COMDTINST M16000.10A 


USCG Marine Safety Manual 


VOLUME V

INVESTIGATIONS

AND ENFORCEMENT

APRIL 2008 

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 
2100 Second Street, S.W. 

Washington, DC 20593-0001 

Staff Symbol: CG-545 

Phone: (202) 372-1029 

Fax: (202) 372-1907 

COMDTINST M16000.10A 

April 24, 2008 

COMMANDANT INSTRUCTION M16000.10A 

Subj: USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND 

ENFORCEMENT 

1. PURPOSE. This Manual established policies and procedures for the activities associated with 

the investigation of marine casualties, investigation into recreational boating deaths, 

detecting violations of criminal and other statutes for law enforcement purposes, taking 

remedial law enforcement action such as civil penalties and suspension and revocation, 

investigating pollution, and enforcing international treaties. 

2. ACTION. Area, district, and sector commanders, commanders of maintenance and logistics 

commands, Commander Deployable Operations Group, commanding officers of 

headquarters units, assistant commandants for directorates, Judge Advocate General, and 

special staff offices at Headquarters shall ensure that the provisions of this Manual are 

followed. Internet release is authorized. 

3. DIRECTIVES AFFECTED. The USCG Marine Safety Manual Volume V: Investigations, 

COMDTINST M16000.10 dated 27 February 1989 and all Commandant (CG-545) Policy 

letters issued prior to the date of signature of this manual, except Policy letters 2-06 and 3-06, 

are hereby cancelled. 

4. DISCUSSION. 

a. This Manual incorporates all CG-545 Policy letters issued prior to the date of this letter 

with the exception of Policy letters 2-06 and 3-06. This manual outlines the domestic and 

international law and policy framework for marine safety investigations activities and gives 

fundamental policy guidance and operational procedures for the Marine Investigations 

Program. 

DISTRIBUTION – SDL No. 149 

A 

B 

D 

E 

F 

G 

H 

a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r s t u v w x y z 

5 8 10 1 

1 2 1 3 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 

NON-STANDARD DISTRIBUTION: 

C 
 16000.10A 

b. An electronic copy of the manual can be found in the resources section of CG Central. 

No paper distribution will be made of this manual. Official distribution will be made via the 

Coast Guard Directives System websites and CD-ROM. 

c. Comments, improvements, corrections, suggestions, new input and recommendations by 

district and field personnel are encouraged and should be forwarded to Commandant (CG545). 

5. FORMS/REPORTS. The forms called for in the Manual are available are available in USCG 

Adobe Forms in Standard Workstation or on the Internet: http://www.uscg.mil/forms/, CG 

Central at http://cgcentral.uscg.mil and Intranet at 

http://cgweb2.comdt.uscg.mil/CGFORMS/Welcome.htm. Shipping Articles, form CG-705, 

stock number 7530-00-F01-0020; Master’s Report of Seaman Shipped or Discharged, form 

CG-735T, stock number 7530-00-F01-0170; and Merchant Marine Inspection Requirements, 

form CG-835, stock number 7530-00-F01-0250 may be ordered through the Engineering 

Logistics Center, Baltimore, MD. License To Merchant Marine Officer (Accountable Form), 

form CG-2849, may be obtained through the National Maritime Center. 

JAMES A. WATSON /s/ 

Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard 

Director of Prevention Policy 

2 
COMDTINST M16000.10A 

RECORD OF CHANGES 

CHANGE 

NUMBER 

DATE OF 

CHANGE 

DATE 

ENTERED 

BY WHOM 

ENTERED 
USCG Marine Safety Manual 

Volume V: Investigations and Enforcement

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Table Table 

of of 

Contents
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL

VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

TABLE OF CONTENTS

TOC-1 

Chapter A1: HISTORY AND TRADITION 

A. INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................................................................A1-1 

B. HISTORY............................................................................................................................................................................A1-1 

C. OVERVIEW OF THE MODERN MARINE SAFETY PROGRAM .................................................................................................A1-2 

D. PURPOSE, ORGANIZATION, AND USE OF THIS VOLUME .....................................................................................................A1-3 

E. STATUS OF THE VOLUME...................................................................................................................................................A1-4 

Chapter A2: AUTHORITY FOR INVESTIGATION 

A. AUTHORITY VERSUS REQUIREMENT TO INVESTIGATE.......................................................................................................A2-1 

B. LEGAL AUTHORITY – GENERAL ........................................................................................................................................A2-1 

C. GENERAL LAW ENFORCEMENT AUTHORITIES...................................................................................................................A2-2 

D. AUTHORITY TO CONDUCT MARINE CASUALTY INVESTIGATIONS .....................................................................................A2-2 

E. AUTHORITY TO CONDUCT POLLUTION INVESTIGATIONS...................................................................................................A2-4 

F. AUTHORITY TO CONDUCT RECREATIONAL BOATING ACCIDENT INVESTIGATIONS ...........................................................A2-5 

G. AUTHORITY TO CONDUCT PORTS AND WATERWAYS SAFETY INVESTIGATIONS ...............................................................A2-5 

H. AUTHORITY TO CONDUCT PERSONNEL INVESTIGATIONS ..................................................................................................A2-6 

I. AUTHORITY TO CONDUCT CIVIL OFFENSE INVESTIGATIONS ..............................................................................................A2-6 

Chapter A3: OVERARCHING POLICIES 

A. MARINE INVESTIGATIONS PROGRAM VISION AND MISSION..............................................................................................A3-1 

B. COMMITMENT TO PROFESSIONALISM ................................................................................................................................A3-1

C. SAFETY OF COAST GUARD PERSONNEL.............................................................................................................................A3-2 

D. ENFORCEMENT STANCE AND RELATIONSHIP TO RESPONSE ACTIVITIES DURING A MARINE INVESTIGATION...................A3-3 

E. SUBPOENAS .......................................................................................................................................................................A3-6 

F. COOPERATION WITH OTHER UNITS/AGENCIES ..................................................................................................................A3-9 

G. THE IMO CODE FOR THE INVESTIGATION OF MARINE CASUALTIES AND INCIDENTS ......................................................A3-15 

H. LABOR – MANAGEMENT DISPUTES .................................................................................................................................A3-17 

I. MERCHANT MARINER’S RECORD/WANTED LIST..............................................................................................................A3-17 

J. INFORMATION/OTHER RESOURCES...................................................................................................................................A3-20 

Chapter A4: TRAINING AND CERTIFICATION OF 

MARINE INVESTIGATIONS 

A. TRAINING AND CERTIFICATION.........................................................................................................................................A4-1 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL

VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

TABLE OF CONTENTS

TOC-2 

B. ASSIGNMENT AND DESIGNATION ......................................................................................................................................A4-2 

C. MARINE INVESTIGATOR BADGES AND CREDENTIALS........................................................................................................A4-3 

D. CARRIAGE OF FIREARMS...................................................................................................................................................A4-4 

Chapter A5: LEVELS OF EFFORT AND TYPE OF 

INVESTIGATION 

A. DISCRETION ......................................................................................................................................................................A5-1 

B. DEFINITIONS..................................................................................................................................................................... A5-1 

C. GENERAL INFORMATION REGARDING LEVELS OF INVESTIGATIVE EFFORT.......................................................................A5-1 

D. PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATIONS ........................................................................................................................................A5-2 

E. DATA COLLECTION ACTIVITIES.........................................................................................................................................A5-4 

F. INFORMAL INVESTIGATIONS ..............................................................................................................................................A5-4 

G. FORMAL INVESTIGATIONS.................................................................................................................................................A5-5 

H. CONDUCT OF FORMAL PROCEEDINGS ...............................................................................................................................A5-8 

I. OPENING THE PROCEEDINGS ............................................................................................................................................A5-16 

J. DOCUMENTING THE PROCEEDINGS...................................................................................................................................A5-25 

K. CLOSING THE PROCEEDINGS ...........................................................................................................................................A5-29 

L. NATIONAL TRANSPORTATION SAFETY BOARD (NTSB) ..................................................................................................A5-30 

Chapter A6: OFFICIAL RECORDS AND REPORTS OF 

INVESTIGATION 

A. OFFICIAL RECORD OF THE INVESTIGATION.........................................................................................................A6-1 

B. ROIS AND ACTIVITY FILES.........................................................................................................................................A6-1 

C. RETENTION OF INVESTIGATIVE RECORDS............................................................................................................A6-3 

D. FORMAT AND TEMPLATE FOR REPORTS OF INVESTIGATION ..........................................................................A6-3 

Chapter A7: APPEALS OF REPORTS OF 

INVESTIGATION 

A. THE ROI IS NOT A DECISION.............................................................................................................................................A7-1 

B. RE-OPENING AN INVESTIGATION, RECONSIDERING AND REVISING THE ROI.....................................................................A7-2 

C. HOW A PERSON FILES AN APPEAL.....................................................................................................................................A7-4 

D. RIGHT OF FURTHER APPEAL..............................................................................................................................................A7-4 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL

VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

TABLE OF CONTENTS

TOC-3 

Chapter A8: PUBLIC AND MEDIA RELATIONS 

A. CONFIDENTIALITY IN MARINE INVESTIGATION.................................................................................................................A8-1 

B. MECHANISMS FOR PUBLIC INFORMATION .........................................................................................................................A8-3 

C. TIMING OF BRIEFINGS, INTERVIEWS, AND PRESS RELEASES..............................................................................................A8-4 

Chapter A9: CONGRESSMAN JAMES SENER AWARD

A. PROGRAM OVERVIEW .......................................................................................................................................................A9-1 

B. KEY CHARACTERISTICS OF THE EVALUATION CRITERIA...................................................................................................A9-2 

C. EVALUATION SYSTEM .......................................................................................................................................................A9-3 

D. FORMAT OF SUBMISSIONS.................................................................................................................................................A9-7 

Chapter B1: THE MARINE INVESTIGATION PROCESS 

A. THE MARINE INVESTIGATION PROCESS ............................................................................................................................B1-1 

Chapter B2: DETECTION OF INCIDENTS 

A. INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................................................................B2-1

B. NOTIFICATIONS FROM THE PUBLIC....................................................................................................................................B2-1 

C. ACTIVE SURVEILLANCE/DETECTION OPERATIONS............................................................................................................B2-3

D. NOTIFICATION FROM OTHER COAST GUARD UNITS ..........................................................................................................B2-4

E. REPORTS FROM OTHER LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES....................................................................................................B2-5

F. REPORTS FROM FOREIGN GOVERNMENTS AND THE INTERNATIONAL MARITIME ORGANIZATION (IMO)..........................B2-6

Chapter B3: FACT-FINDING AND EVIDENCE HANDLING 

A. OVERVIEW ........................................................................................................................................................................B3-1

B. OPERATIONAL THREAT ASSESSMENT................................................................................................................................B3-1 

C. SECURING THE SCENE .......................................................................................................................................................B3-2

D. THE “SHEL” MODEL........................................................................................................................................................B3-4

E. INSPECTING THE INCIDENT SCENE ...................................................................................................................................B3-14 

F. EVIDENCE........................................................................................................................................................................B3-15 

G. PHYSICAL EVIDENCE.......................................................................................................................................................B3-17 

H. DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE .............................................................................................................................................B3-19

I. ORAL EVIDENCE...............................................................................................................................................................B3-22
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL

VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

TABLE OF CONTENTS

TOC-4 

J. OTHER INFORMATION.......................................................................................................................................................B3-28

Chapter B4: MARINE CASUALTY ANALYSIS 

A. GENERATING A TIMELINE ................................................................................................................................................. B4-1 

B. CONDUCTING CAUSAL ANALYSIS...................................................................................................................................... B4-1 

C. CONDUCTING HUMAN ERROR ANALYSIS ........................................................................................................................B4-18

D. JOB AIDS.........................................................................................................................................................................B4-29 

Chapter B5: VIOLATION ANALYSIS 

A. GENERAL ..........................................................................................................................................................................B5-1

B. STEP ONE: IDENTIFY LAWS AND REGULATIONS IN FORCE TO DETERMINE JURISDICTION ................................................B5-1

C. STEP TWO: IDENTIFY PEOPLE AND ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED.......................................................................................B5-3

D. STEP THREE: CONSIDER HUMAN ERROR..........................................................................................................................B5-4

E. STEP FOUR: REFER VIOLATIONS FOR APPROPRIATE ENFORCEMENT...............................................................................B5-8

F. SELECTED LAWS APPLICABLE IN THE MARITIME REALM ..................................................................................................B5-9

Chapter B6: SAFETY RECOMMENDATIONS AND SAFETY 

ALERT 

A. SAFETY RECOMMENDATIONS IN GENERAL .......................................................................................................................B6-1

B. DRAFTING SAFETY RECOMMENDATIONS ..........................................................................................................................B6-1

C. REVIEWING SAFETY RECOMMENDATIONS.........................................................................................................................B6-4

D. RELEASING SAFETY RECOMMENDATIONS AND FINAL ACTION .........................................................................................B6-5

E. IMPLEMENTING FINAL ACTION..........................................................................................................................................B6-5

F. SAFETY ALERTS IN GENERAL ............................................................................................................................................B6-6

G. DRAFTING SAFETY ALERTS ..............................................................................................................................................B6-7

H. REVIEWING SAFETY ALERTS.............................................................................................................................................B6-9

I. RELEASING SAFETY ALERTS ............................................................................................................................................B6-10 

Chapter B7: MARINE CASUALTY INVESTIGATION 

A. MARINE CASUALTIES AND INCIDENTS ..............................................................................................................................B7-1 

B. MARINE CASUALTY TERMINOLOGY AND ANALYSIS REQUIREMENTS ...............................................................................B7-7

C. MARINE CASUALTIES AND INCIDENTS REPORTED TO THE INTERNATIONAL MARITIME ORGANIZATION (IMO) ................B7-8

D. VESSEL FIRES AND EXPLOSIONS .....................................................................................................................................B7-11 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL

VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

TABLE OF CONTENTS

TOC-5 

E. VESSEL NAVIGATION INCIDENTS.....................................................................................................................................B7-17 

F. STABILITY RELATED INCIDENTS......................................................................................................................................B7-29 

G. OCCUPATIONAL INJURY OR DEATH.................................................................................................................................B7-33 

H. PERSONS MISSING AND PRESUMED DEAD .......................................................................................................................B7-38 

Chapter B8: POLLUTION INCIDENT INVESTIGATION 

A. GENERAL ..........................................................................................................................................................................B8-1

B. DETERMINING LEVELS OF INVESTIGATIVE EFFORT FOR POLLUTION INCIDENTS ...............................................................B8-2

C. MARINE CASUALTIES INVOLVING POLLUTION INCIDENTS REPORTED TO THE INTERNATIONAL MARITIME ORGANIZATION

(IMO).....................................................................................................................................................................................B8-5

D. EVIDENCE NEEDED TO PROSECUTE A NOTICE OF VIOLATION CLASS I CIVIL PENALTY....................................................B8-6

E. DETERMINING APPROPRIATE POLLUTION SAMPLING ACTION...........................................................................................B8-8

F. NATURAL SOURCE DISCHARGE .......................................................................................................................................B8-11 

G. ASSESSING SHORELINE IMPACTS ....................................................................................................................................B8-12 

Chapter B9: PERSONNEL INVESTIGATION 

A. PERSONNEL INVESTIGATIONS............................................................................................................................................B9-1

B. STEP ONE: DETECTION OF INCIDENTS ..............................................................................................................................B9-2 

C. STEP TWO: FACT FINDING ................................................................................................................................................B9-4

D. STEP THREE: IDENTIFY LAWS AND REGULATIONS IN FORCE............................................................................................B9-5

E. STEP FOUR: REVIEW THE PEOPLE INVOLVED....................................................................................................................B9-9

F. STEP FIVE: CONSIDER HUMAN ERROR............................................................................................................................B9-11 

G. STEP SIX: CONSIDER OMISSIONS....................................................................................................................................B9-11 

H. STEP SEVEN: CONSIDER THE EVIDENCE FOR EACH ELEMENT ........................................................................................B9-11 

I. STEP EIGHT: REPORT APPARENT VIOLATIONS ................................................................................................................B9-12 

J. OTHER INVESTIGATIVE ISSUES .........................................................................................................................................B9-12 

K. INTERNAL ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES .....................................................................................................................B9-14 

Chapter B10: BOATING ACCIDENT INVESTIGATION 

A. LEGAL AUTHORITY.........................................................................................................................................................B10-1 

B. BOATING ACCIDENT INVESTIGATIONS ............................................................................................................................B10-1 

C. HOW BOATING ACCIDENT INFORMATION IS USED..........................................................................................................B10-2 

D. CONDUCT OF BOATING ACCIDENT INVESTIGATIONS.......................................................................................................B10-4 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL

VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

TABLE OF CONTENTS

TOC-6 

E. ADMINISTRATIVE CORRESPONDENCE CONCERNING BOATING ACCIDENTS.....................................................................B10-6 

F. DEFINITIONS ....................................................................................................................................................................B10-7 

Chapter B11: LOAD LINE VIOLATION INVESTIGATION 

A. COAST GUARD RESPONSIBILITIES FOR LOAD LINE ENFORCEMENT .................................................................................B11-1 

B. TIMING OF LOAD LINE INVESTIGATIONS ........................................................................................................................B11-3 

C. STEP ONE: OBSERVING LOAD LINES FOR SUBMERGENCE ..............................................................................................B11-5 

D. STEP TWO: READING DRAFTS ........................................................................................................................................B11-8 

E. STEP THREE AND FOUR: REVIEWING LOGBOOKS............................................................................................................B11-9 

F. STEP FIVE: EXAMINING THE LOAD LINE CERTIFICATE .................................................................................................B11-11 

G. STEP SIX: DOCUMENTING VIOLATIONS.........................................................................................................................B11-11

H. STEP SEVEN: TAKING WATER SAMPLES.......................................................................................................................B11-11 

Chapter B12: OFFSHORE INCIDENT INVESTIGATION 

A. OFFSHORE ACTIVITIES ....................................................................................................................................................B12-1 

B. RELATIONSHIP TO MINERALS MANAGEMENT SERVICE (MMS) ......................................................................................B12-3 

C. RELATIONSHIP TO THE OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH ADMINISTRATION (OSHA) .................................................B12-4 

Chapter C1: ENFORCEMENT 

A. ENFORCEMENT PERSPECTIVE AND SCOPE .........................................................................................................................C1-1 

B. ENFORCEMENT OBJECTIVES AND PRINCIPLES ...................................................................................................................C1-1

C. RELATIVE RANKING OF ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS .............................................................................................................C1-3

D. ENFORCEMENT POLICY .....................................................................................................................................................C1-5

E. ON-SCENE ENFORCEMENT OPTIONS AND RESPONSIBILITIES.............................................................................................C1-8

F. UNIT ENFORCEMENT OPTIONS AND RESPONSIBILITIES......................................................................................................C1-9

G. DISTRICT ENFORCEMENT OPTIONS AND RESPONSIBILITIES ............................................................................................C1-10 

H. COMMANDANT ENFORCEMENT RESPONSIBILITIES..........................................................................................................C1-11 

I. INTRA-GOVERNMENTAL AND INTERNATIONAL ENFORCEMENT COORDINATION ..............................................................C1-11 

Chapter C2: WARNINGS 

A. WARNINGS........................................................................................................................................................................C2-1

B. USE OF WARNINGS............................................................................................................................................................C2-1

C. PROCESS FOR WARNINGS ..................................................................................................................................................C2-3
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL

VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

TABLE OF CONTENTS

TOC-7 

Chapter C3: CIVIL PENALTIES 

A. CIVIL PENALTIES ..............................................................................................................................................................C3-1

B. TYPES OF CIVIL PENALTIES...............................................................................................................................................C3-2

C. PROCESS............................................................................................................................................................................C3-3

D. PENALTY ASSESSMENT UNDER THE FWPCA..................................................................................................................C3-11 

Chapter C4: SUSPENSION AND REVOCATION 

A. INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................................................................C4-6

B. COMPLAINTS AND ANSWERS...........................................................................................................................................C4-13 

C. PROCEDURES PRIOR TO HEARING....................................................................................................................................C4-42 

D. DEFAULTS.......................................................................................................................................................................C4-55 

E. SETTLEMENT AGREEMENTS ............................................................................................................................................C4-56 

F. HEARINGS........................................................................................................................................................................C4-60 

G. POST-HEARING PROCEDURES. ........................................................................................................................................C4-73 

H. APPEAL PROCESS. ...........................................................................................................................................................C4-76 

Chapter C5: ADMINISTRATIVE CLEMENCY 

A. ADMINISTRATIVE CLEMENCY ...........................................................................................................................................C5-1

B. SUBMITTING A CLEMENCY APPLICATION PACKAGE..........................................................................................................C5-4

C. ADMINISTRATIVE CLEMENCY REVIEW BOARD ...............................................................................................................C5-12 

Chapter C6: DRUG AND ALCOHOL PROGRAM 

A. DRUG AND ALCOHOL PROGRAM.......................................................................................................................................C3-1

B. MARINE EMPLOYER RESPONSIBILITIES .............................................................................................................................C3-8

C. OCCASIONS TO CONDUCT DRUG AND ALCOHOL TESTS..................................................................................................C8-13 

D. POSITIVE DRUG AND ALCOHOL TESTS .............................................................................................................................C3-18 

E. REFUSAL TO TEST ...........................................................................................................................................................C3-19 

F. DRUG AND ALCOHOL PROGRAM INSPECTOR (DAPI).......................................................................................................C3-20 

G. LETTERS OF REGULATORY COMPLIANCE........................................................................................................................C3-21 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL

VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

TABLE OF CONTENTS

TOC-8 

Chapter C7: CRIMINAL ENFORCEMENT 

A. CRIMINAL ENFORCEMENT PROCESS................................................................................................................................. C7-1

B. RESPONSIBILITIES DURING CRIMINAL ENFORCEMENT PROCEDURES ................................................................................C7-2

C. MARINE INVESTIGATIONS .................................................................................................................................................C7-4

D. POST INVESTIGATION ACTIONS.........................................................................................................................................C7-5
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 
USCG Marine Safety Manual 

Volume V: Investigations and Enforcement

PART A: ADMINISTRATION 

Chapter One: 

History and Tradition
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART A: ADMINISTRATION

CHAPTER 1: HISTORY AND TRADITION 

A1-i 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

A. INTRODUCTION ............................... 1

A.1. GENERAL .........................................................................................................................................................................1

A.2. TRADITIONAL PROGRAMS ................................................................................................................................................1

B. HISTORY ................................... 1

B.1. ORIGIN IN ACCIDENTS OF THE 1830S................................................................................................................................1

B.2. TWO OBJECTIVES OF THE PROGRAM ................................................................................................................................2

B.3. LEADERSHIP .....................................................................................................................................................................2

C. OVERVIEW OF THE MODERN MARINE SAFETY PROGRAM .... 2

C.1. INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................................................................................2

C.2. PROGRAM ACTIVITIES ......................................................................................................................................................3

C.3. FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES OF THE PROGRAM.................................................................................................................3

D. PURPOSE, ORGANIZATION, AND USE OF THIS VOLUME ... 3

D.1. PURPOSE ..........................................................................................................................................................................3

D.1.a. General ....................................................................................................................................................................3

D.1.b. Operational Law Enforcement Program..................................................................................................................3

D.2. ORGANIZATION................................................................................................................................................................4

D.3. USE ..................................................................................................................................................................................4

E. STATUS OF THE VOLUME ........................ 4

E.1. INTENDED PURPOSE..........................................................................................................................................................4
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART A: ADMINISTRATION

CHAPTER 1: HISTORY AND TRADITION 

A1-1 

A.1. GENERAL

A.2. TRADITIONAL 

PROGRAMS

B.1. ORIGIN IN 

ACCIDENTS OF THE 

A. INTRODUCTION

The United States Coast Guard (USCG) is the nation’s leading marine safety 

organization and has broad, multifaceted jurisdictional authority and responsibilities. 

In executing these responsibilities, the Coast Guard relies upon the information it 

develops through detailed investigation of various occurrences. The specific statutory 

basis for the Coast Guard’s Marine Investigations Program come from various 

statutes, including Title 46, U.S. Code (USC) Part 6301, which is indeed expansive: 

“The Secretary shall prescribe regulations for the immediate investigation of marine 

casualties under this part or decide as closely as possible - (1) the cause of the 

casualty, including the cause of any death; (2) whether an act of misconduct,

incompetence, negligence, unskillfulness, or willful violation of federal law committed 

by any individual licensed under Part E of this subtitle has contributed to the cause of 

the casualty, so that appropriate remedial action under Chapter 77 of this title may be 

taken; (3) whether an act of misconduct, incompetence, negligence, unskillfulness, or 

willful violation of law committed by any person, including an officer, employee or 

member of the Coast Guard, contributed to the cause of the casualty, or to a death 

involved in the casualty; (4) whether there is evidence that an act subjecting the 

offender to a civil penalty under the laws of the United States has been committed, so 

that appropriate action may be undertaken to collect the penalty; (5) whether there is 

evidence that a criminal act under the laws of the United States has been committed, 

so that the matter may be referred to appropriate authorities for prosecution; and (6) 

whether there is need for new laws or regulations, or amendment or repeal of existing 

laws or regulations, to prevent the recurrence of the casualty.” 

After a long series of marine incidents in the early 1800s involving heavy losses of life 

and property, Congress enacted its first marine safety legislation and created a federal 

organization, the Steamboat Inspection Service, to preserve and protect the public 

from preventable marine incidents. The Coast Guard's current marine safety 

programs retain the philosophical objectives of those historical preservation and 

protection programs. In the modern world, a myriad statutes and regulations affect 

the marine environment and the marine industry. This resulted in the creation of 

several distinct Coast Guard programs concerned with marine safety and related 

issues: Commercial Vessel Safety (CVS), Port and Environmental Safety (PES), 

Marine Environmental Response (MER), Waterways Management (WWM), 

Recreational Boating Safety (RBS), and Bridge Administration (BA). The Marine 

Investigations Program supports all of these statute driven programs. 

B. HISTORY

The Coast Guard’s Marine Investigations Program has been a vital arm of its marine 

safety activities since the 1830’s when the program’s predecessor, the Steamboat 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART A: ADMINISTRATION

CHAPTER 1: HISTORY AND TRADITION 

A1-2 

1830S

B.2. TWO 

OBJECTIVES OF THE 

PROGRAM

B.3. LEADERSHIP

C.1.

INTRODUCTION

Inspection Service, was established. In 1832 alone, approximately 14% of the steam 

vessels in operation were destroyed by explosion and over 1000 people were killed. 

These explosions happened largely because there were no vessel inspection laws or 

rules of navigation. In some cases, mariner incompetence, negligence, and/or 

misconduct were contributing causes. The U.S. Congress reacted to these facts by 

establishing inspection laws and creating the Steamship Inspection Service. 

Subsequent revisions to the law created both the Vessel Inspection and Marine 

Investigations Programs, whose precepts are largely unchanged in today’s Coast 

Guard: 1) to ensure that licensed mariners were competent (and to revoke those 

licenses upon evidence of incompetence); 2) to ensure that the vessel safety laws were 

observed; and 3) to suggest where new laws or inspection rules were necessary to 

save lives. 

The two objectives given the Revenue Cutter Service and the Steamboat Inspection 

Service are every bit as appropriate and as challenging today as they were when 

issued. The Constitution must be conscientiously upheld, but this priority must be 

accomplished while at the same time 1) thoroughly determine the causes of incidents, 

and 2) effectively detecting and apprehending those who would circumvent the laws 

of our nation for personal reasons and private gain. We must also strive to conduct 

investigations in such a way that compliance is our goal, not imposing penalties. All 

the while, we must safeguard lives at sea and the environment by finding out why 

incidents occur and eliminating those causes, whether those causes have law 

enforcement consequences or not. 

Over the span of our more than two hundred years, the Coast Guard has earned a 

reputation as the world’s premier maritime law enforcement and marine safety 

organization. Today, our expertise in these areas is internationally recognized, and we 

continue to lead the international community forward. Marine safety personnel must, 

therefore, uphold and enhance our preeminent reputation as the Coast Guard moves 

into its third century of service. 

C. OVERVIEW OF THE MODERN MARINE SAFETY PROGRAM

The historical missions have evolved into the modern personnel action and marine 

casualty investigation segments of the Marine Investigations Program; one of the 

primary purposes in conducting marine investigations is to determine if misconduct 

or negligence on the part of licensed mariners contributed in any way to causing an 

incident. Our investigation and law enforcement roles have grown since 1852, 

however, to include investigation into recreational boating deaths, detecting violations 

of criminal and other statutes for law enforcement purposes, taking remedial law 

enforcement action such as civil penalties and suspension and revocation, 

investigating pollution, and enforcing international treaties such as the International 

Convention on Load Lines, 1966 (ICLL), the International Convention for the Safety 

of Life at Sea 1974 (SOLAS), the International Convention on Standards of Training, 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART A: ADMINISTRATION

CHAPTER 1: HISTORY AND TRADITION 

A1-3 

C.2. PROGRAM 

ACTIVITIES

C.3. FUNDAMENTAL 

PRINCIPLES OF THE 

PROGRAM

D.1. PURPOSE D.1.a. General 

D.1.b. Operational Law Enforcement Program 

Certification and Watchkeeping for Seafarers, 1978 (STCW), and the International 

Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships, 1973 , as amended 1978 

(MARPOL 73/78). 

The Marine Investigations Program accomplishes its mission through the 

investigation of various incidents, and through various follow-up activities designed 

to ensure these incidents are not repeated. Investigative activities are intended to 

uncover the causes of incidents, document the events and their causes, and initiate 

the necessary corrective actions. Investigations also detect and suppress federal law 

violations. Accordingly, this manual addresses itself primarily to the on-scene 

investigative process as the principal vehicle for the program. 

There are four fundamental principles upon which the conduct of all marine 

investigations is based. First, Congress clearly intends the Coast Guard to investigate 

many incidents and to board vessels subject to U.S. jurisdiction to enforce applicable 

maritime laws. Second, compliance with laws and principles protecting lives and the 

environment is the Coast Guard’s objective, not punishment. Third, the vast 

majority of the vessels and shore facilities that are subject to Coast Guard jurisdiction 

are operated by law-abiding mariners and facility personnel who are entitled to be 

treated with the utmost courtesy and respect. Fourth and finally, the safety of Coast 

Guard personnel is always a vital concern. The continuing challenge is to optimize 

the balance of these elements in each situation. 

D. PURPOSE, ORGANIZATION, AND USE OF THIS VOLUME

This manual outlines the domestic and international law and policy framework for 

marine safety investigations activities and gives fundamental policy guidance and 

operational procedures for the Marine Investigations Program. 

This manual briefly addresses the Operational Law Enforcement Program to provide 

a general sense of Coast Guard responsibilities in this area. The underlying intent is 

to provide marine safety personnel with sufficient guidance to enable them to take 

prompt action when urgently required, and/or to refer emerging cases to Coast 

Guard experts in the Operational Law Enforcement Program. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART A: ADMINISTRATION

CHAPTER 1: HISTORY AND TRADITION 

A1-4 

D.2.

ORGANIZATION

This manual is organized as follows: 

• Part A: General policy and administrative procedures. 

• Part B: Policies and information applicable to special types of investigation 

D.3. USE

E.1. INTENDED 

PURPOSE

• Part C: Policy dealing with enforcement, including suspension and revocation 

enforcement actions and the Coast Guard’s Drug and Alcohol Program 

applicable to Merchant Mariners. 

Area Commanders, District Commanders, Sector Commanders and unit 

Commanding Officers shall ensure that they and their personnel are familiar with the 

provisions of this volume. The volume must be used in concert with appropriate 

marine safety laws and regulations. In any case of apparent conflict between

provisions of this manual and any statue or regulation, the legal requirements shall be 

observed. The Office of Investigations and Analysis, Commandant (CG-545) should 

be informed of the conflict so that the matter can be resolved. In case of conflict 

between provisions of this volume and conventional practice, the appropriate 

operational commander and Commandant (CG-545) should be contacted for 

resolution of any doubt. 

E. STATUS OF THE VOLUME

This manual is intended only to improve the internal management of the Coast 

Guard. Neither the manual nor any Coast Guard guidelines, procedures, instructions, 

directives, rules, or regulations implementing this manual shall create, or shall be 

construed to create, any right or benefit, substantive or procedural (including without 

limitation any right or benefit under the Administrative Procedures Act), legally 

enforceable by any party against the U.S., its agencies or instrumentality’s, officers, 

employees, or any other person. The Coast Guard retains the discretion to deviate 

from or change this guidance without notice. 
USCG Marine Safety Manual 

Volume V: Investigations and Enforcement

PART A: ADMINISTRATION 

Chapter Two: 

Authority for Investigation
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART A: ADMINISTRATION

CHAPTER 2: AUTHORITY FOR INVESTIGATION 

A2-i 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

A. AUTHORITY VERSUS REQUIREMENT TO INVESTIGATE...... 1

A.1. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................................................1

A.2. AUTHORITY TO INVESTIGATE...........................................................................................................................................1

A.3. REQUIREMENT TO INVESTIGATE.......................................................................................................................................1

A.4. REPORTING OF INCIDENTS................................................................................................................................................1

A.5. INVESTIGATIONS CONDUCTED UNDER MULTIPLE AUTHORITIES........................................................................................1

B. LEGAL AUTHORITY – GENERAL .................... 1

B.1. INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................................................................................1

B.2. GEOGRAPHIC JURISDICTION .............................................................................................................................................1

B.3. JURISDICTION OVER VESSELS...........................................................................................................................................2

B.4. JURISDICTION OVER A PERSON .........................................................................................................................................2

B.5. JURISDICTION OVER ACTS ................................................................................................................................................2

C. GENERAL LAW ENFORCEMENT AUTHORITIES ............ 2

C.1. INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................................................................................2

C.2. LAW ENFORCEMENT FUNCTIONS – 14 USC 89.................................................................................................................2

C.3. CGIS – 14 USC 95 ...........................................................................................................................................................2

D. AUTHORITY TO CONDUCT MARINE CASUALTY INVESTIGATIONS2

D.1. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................................................2

D.2. 33 USC 1227 – WATERFRONT FACILITIES .......................................................................................................................3

D.2.a. General ....................................................................................................................................................................3

D.2.b. Delegation of Authorities.........................................................................................................................................3

D.3. 43 USC 1348 – OUTER CONTINENTAL SHELF (OCS).......................................................................................................3

D.4. 46 USC 3315 – REQUIRED DISCLOSURE ..........................................................................................................................3

D.5. 46 USC 3717 – MARINE SAFETY INFORMATION SYSTEM (MSIS).....................................................................................3

D.6. 46 USC 6101 – REPORTING REQUIREMENTS....................................................................................................................3

D.7. 46 USC 6301 – SCOPE.....................................................................................................................................................3

D.8. 46 USC 6304 – SUBPOENA AUTHORITY...........................................................................................................................3

E. AUTHORITY TO CONDUCT POLLUTION INVESTIGATIONS .... 3

E.1. INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................................................................................3

E.2. 33 USC 1227 – WATERFRONT FACILITIES........................................................................................................................4

E.3. 33 USC 1321 – FEDERAL WATER POLLUTION CONTROL ACT (FWPCA).........................................................................4

E.3.a. General.....................................................................................................................................................................4

E.3.b. Delegation of Authorities .........................................................................................................................................4

E.4. 33 USC 1417 – OCEAN DUMPING.....................................................................................................................................4

E.5. 33 USC 1901-1912 – APPS (MARPOL)..........................................................................................................................5

E.5.a. General.....................................................................................................................................................................5

E.5.b. Delegation of Authorities .........................................................................................................................................5

F. AUTHORITY TO CONDUCT RECREATIONAL BOATING ACCIDENT 

INVESTIGATIONS ................................. 5

F.1. 46 USC 6301 - INVESTIGATION MARINE CASUALTIES.....................................................................................................5
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART A: ADMINISTRATION

CHAPTER 2: AUTHORITY FOR INVESTIGATION 

A2-ii 

G. AUTHORITY TO CONDUCT PORTS AND WATERWAYS SAFETY 

INVESTIGATIONS ................................. 5

G.1. 33 USC 1227 – WATERFRONT FACILITIES .......................................................................................................................5

H. AUTHORITY TO CONDUCT PERSONNEL INVESTIGATIONS .... 6

H.1. 46 USC 2103 – SUPERINTENDENCE OF THE MERCHANT MARINE....................................................................................6

H.2. 46 USC 7701 TO 7707 – ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE ..................................................................................................6

H.3. 46 USC 7705 – SUBPOENAS AND OATHS .........................................................................................................................6

I. AUTHORITY TO CONDUCT CIVIL PENALTY INVESTIGATIONS 6

I.1. AUTHORITY .......................................................................................................................................................................6
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART A: ADMINISTRATION

CHAPTER 2: AUTHORITY FOR INVESTIGATION 

A2-1 

A.1.

INTRODUCTION

A.2. AUTHORITY 

TO INVESTIGATE

A.3. REQUIREMENT 

TO INVESTIGATE

A.4. REPORTING 

OF INCIDENTS

A.5.

INVESTIGATIONS 

CONDUCTED UNDER 

MULTIPLE 

AUTHORITIES

B.1.

INTRODUCTION

B.2. GEOGRAPHIC 

A. AUTHORITY VERSUS REQUIREMENT TO INVESTIGATE

In considering how operational investigative resources will be deployed, 

Commanding Officers and their personnel should carefully consider their general 

legal authority to investigate various types of incidents along with any specific legal 

mandates related to the incident. The mere existence of legal authority does not 

automatically mandate that the Coast Guard investigate. There is a distinction 

between the authorities to investigate versus a requirement to investigate. 

In general terms, the Coast Guard has been granted legal authority to investigate 

various incidents based upon various statutes and regulations. These legal authorities 

can loosely be thought of as permission to conduct investigative activities and as 

granting powers to the Investigating Officer (IO). 

In some instances, there has been confusion as to the legal authority to investigate 

versus a legal mandate for the Coast Guard to investigate. The authority to 

investigate should be viewed separately from the requirement to investigate (if any 

exists). 46 USC 6301 requires the Coast Guard to investigate certain incidents. The 

implementing regulations in 46 CFR 4 permit the Coast Guard to determine the level 

of investigation and investigative effort. In considering whether the Coast Guard is 

required to investigate, the IO should look for specific statutory or regulatory 

language mandating the investigation. 

There has been confusion with the requirement that the public report certain

incidents versus the Coast Guard’s legal authority to investigate that incident or with 

the legal requirement that the Coast Guard investigate the incident. Reporting 

requirements should be viewed as completely separate from both the authority to 

investigate and the requirement to investigate. 

Of note, IO’s often conduct investigations under multiple authorities. Due care must 

be taken to understand the powers and limitations of each authority in order not to 

exceed that authority, possibly tainting your case by acting beyond the scope of the 

authority. 

B. LEGAL AUTHORITY – GENERAL

In general terms, when we speak of legal authority, we are saying that a specific 

statute or regulation allows or mandates for the Coast Guard to investigate. 

Jurisdiction covers where, when, and over whom that authority is exercised. When 

conducting an investigation you must establish both authority and jurisdiction before 

you begin. 

Geographic jurisdiction is defined as the territorial range of authority or control. In 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART A: ADMINISTRATION

CHAPTER 2: AUTHORITY FOR INVESTIGATION 

A2-2 

JURISDICTION

B.3.

JURISDICTION OVER 

VESSELS

B.4.

JURISDICTION OVER 

A PERSON

B.5.

JURISDICTION OVER 

ACTS

C.1.

INTRODUCTION

general, the Coast Guard’s geographical jurisdiction is from the waterfront seaward 

and all navigable internal/inland waters. Specific jurisdictional boundaries are defined 

in various statutes depending upon the issue in question. 

In broad terms, the Coast Guard has authority over all U.S. vessels regardless of 

location anywhere in the world, and over all vessels located within U.S. waters. 

In broad terms, the Coast Guard has certain authorities over owners, operators, 

managing operators, agents, masters, and individuals in charge of U.S. vessels and all 

vessels in U.S. waters. Additionally, the Coast Guard has authority over personnel 

holding a U.S. Coast Guard issued Merchant Mariner Credential (MMC). 

In addition to geographical area, vessels, and people, the Coast Guard has jurisdiction 

over certain acts. These include marine casualties, oil spills, and marine violations, to 

name a few.

C. GENERAL LAW ENFORCEMENT AUTHORITIES

The Coast Guard has broad authority to conduct many different types of 

investigations of many different actions in the maritime arena. Coast Guard 

investigative and law enforcement functions start out very broad in scope. 

C.2. LAW 

ENFORCEMENT 

FUNCTIONS – 14

USC 89 

View Cite on Web

C.3. CGIS – 14

USC 95 

D.1.

INTRODUCTION

In general 14 USC 89 authorizes commissioned, warrant and petty officers of the 

Coast Guard to go on board any vessel subject to the jurisdiction or operation of any 

law of the United States, whether on the high seas or on waters over which the 

United States has jurisdiction. These boardings are conducted in order to make 

inquires, examinations, inspections, searches, seizures, and arrests for the prevention, 

detection, and suppression of violations of U.S. laws. 

14 USC 95 authorizes special agents of the Coast Guard Investigative Service to carry 

firearms, execute and serve warrants, and to make arrests. 

D. AUTHORITY TO CONDUCT MARINE CASUALTY INVESTIGATIONS

This section specifically addresses authority to conduct marine casualty investigations 

as well as other statutes directly relating to marine casualties. It delineates all the 

areas in which the Coast Guard has jurisdiction to conduct marine casualty 

investigations. As you read you will see that, along with the general authority to 

conduct investigations, other authorities or mandates are detailed. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART A: ADMINISTRATION

CHAPTER 2: AUTHORITY FOR INVESTIGATION 

A2-3 

D.2. 33 USC

1227 – WATERFRONT 

FACILITIES

View Cite on Web

D.2.a. General 

D.2.b. Delegation of Authorities 

D.3. 43 USC

1348 – OUTER 

CONTINENTAL SHELF

View Cite on Web

D.4. 46 USC

3315 – REQUIRED 

DISCLOSURE

View Cite on Web

D.5. 46 USC

3717 –MSIS 

View Cite on Web

D.6. 46 USC

6101 – REPORTING 

REQUIREMENTS

View Cite on Web

D.7. 46 USC

6301- SCOPE

View Cite on Web

D.8. 46 USC

6304 – SUBPOENA 

AUTHORITY

View Cite on Web

E.1.

INTRODUCTION

33 USC 1227 authorizes the Secretary to investigate any incident, accident, or act 

involving damage to a waterfront facility, or which affects or may affect the safety or 

environmental quality of the ports, harbors, or navigable waters of the United States. 

Additionally, this section gives the Secretary the power to issue subpoenas. 

The Secretary has delegated the authority to Commandant via Department of 

Homeland Security Delegation Number 0170.1. The delegation is through the Port 

and Tanker Safety Act of 1978, which amends the Port and Waterways Safety Act 

(PWSA). The Commandant has delegated authority to conduct investigations and to 

issue subpoenas under 33 USC 1227 to the Captain of the Port (COTP). The COTP 

may authorize IOs to issue subpoenas under 33 USC 1227 on his or her behalf. Such 

authority shall be granted in the IO’s letter of designation. 

43 USC 1348 provides for the investigation of casualties resulting from operations on 

the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS). Additionally, it authorizes the issuing of 

subpoenas and administering of oaths to witnesses. This authority is delegated to the 

IO in 33 CFR 140. 

46 USC 3315 requires the disclosure of certain marine casualties by licensed

individuals during an inspection or investigation. Note: This is not an additional 

reporting requirement. 

Requires a Marine Safety Information System (MSIS) and authorizes collection of 

histories of vessels that operate on the navigable waters of the U.S. The Marine 

Information for Safety and Law Enforcement (MISLE) data system replaced MSIS. 

46 USC 6101 requires the reporting of marine casualties and incidents involving 

United States flag vessels occurring anywhere in the world, and foreign flag vessels 

operating on the navigable waters of the United States. 

46 USC 6301 provides the authority to conduct marine casualty investigations, as well 

as sets forth the scope of the investigation of marine casualties and incidents. 

Provides an IO who is conducting a marine casualty investigation with the necessary 

subpoena authority to require the attendance and testimony of witnesses and the 

production of evidence. It also authorizes a district court of the United States to 

direct compliance with a subpoena. 

E. AUTHORITY TO CONDUCT POLLUTION INVESTIGATIONS

This section specifically addresses the authority to conduct pollution investigations as 

well as other statutes directly related. It delineates the areas in which the Coast 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART A: ADMINISTRATION

CHAPTER 2: AUTHORITY FOR INVESTIGATION 

A2-4 

E.2. 33 USC

1227 – WATERFRONT 

FACILITIES

View Cite on Web

E.3. 33 USC

1321 – FEDERAL 

WATER POLLUTION 

CONTROL ACT 

(FWPCA) 

View Cite on Web

E.3.a. General 

Prohibits the discharge of oil or designated hazardous substances into or upon the 

navigable waters of the U.S., adjoining shorelines, or into or upon the waters of the 

contiguous zone or waters over which the U.S. exercises exclusive management 

authority in quantities that may be harmful. Also, jurisdiction is extended to the high 

seas if you can prove that a discharge will impact the coastline of the United States or 

natural resources in the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ). 

Additionally, it authorizes the Coast Guard to issue and enforce pollution prevention 

regulations; to assess penalties for unlawful discharge of oil and hazardous 

substances, and for violation of prevention and removal regulations; to require 

vessels to have evidence of financial responsibility; and to require notification of 

discharges. 

E.3.b. Delegation of Authorities 

Guard has jurisdiction to conduct pollution investigations. Many of the statutes for 

pollution investigations are the same as those for marine casualty investigations. 

The same authority that allows marine casualty investigations of waterfront facilities 

also authorizes the Secretary to investigate actions by or involving waterfront 

facilities, which affect or may affect the environmental quality of the ports, harbors, 

or navigable waters of the United States. (See D.2 above) 

It also authorizes withholding of a clearance or permit if any owner, operator, or 

person in charge of a vessel is liable or believed to be liable for a civil penalty under 

the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (FWPCA). Finally, this section gives the 

Administrator or Secretary the power to issue subpoenas. 

The Secretary has delegated the authority to Commandant via Department of 

Homeland Security Delegation Number 0170.1. The Commandant has delegated 

authority to conduct investigations and to issue subpoenas under 33 USC 1321 to the 

COTP. The COTP may authorize IO’s to issue subpoenas under 33 USC 1321 on 

his or her behalf. Such authority shall be granted in the IO’s letter of designation. 

E.4. 33 USC

1417 – OCEAN 

DUMPING

View Cite on Web

33 USC 1417 authorizes the Coast Guard to conduct surveillance and other 

appropriate law enforcement activity (such as pollution investigation) to prevent the 

unlawful transportation of material for dumping and unlawful dumping by U.S. and 

foreign vessels. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART A: ADMINISTRATION

CHAPTER 2: AUTHORITY FOR INVESTIGATION 

A2-5 

E.5. 33 USC

1901-1912 -

APPS (MARPOL) 

View Cites on Web

E.5.a. General 

E.5.b. Delegation of Authorities 

33 USC 1901-1912 implements the International Convention for the Prevention of 

Pollution from Ships, 1973, as modified by the Protocol of 1978 relation thereto 

(MARPOL 73/78). Section 1903 authorizes the Coast Guard to enforce provisions 

of the MARPOL convention, the Act to Prevent Pollution from Ships, and Annex IV 

of the Antarctic Protocol relating to discharges of vessels on the high seas and 

Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ). Also, Section 1907 gives the Secretary 

authorization to conduct investigations into violations of this statute as well as issue 

subpoenas. 

The Secretary has delegated the authority to Commandant via Department of 

Homeland Security Delegation Number 0170.1. The Commandant has re-delegates 

authority to conduct investigations and to issue subpoenas under 33 USC 1907 to the 

COTP. The COTP may authorize IOs to issue subpoenas under 33 USC 1907 on his 

or her behalf. Such authority shall be granted in the IO’s letter of designation. 

F. AUTHORITY TO CONDUCT RECREATIONAL BOATING ACCIDENT 

INVESTIGATIONS

F.1. 46 USC

6301 -

INVESTIGATION 

MARINE CASUALTIES

View Cite on Web

G.1. 33 USC

1227 – WATERFRONT 

FACILITIES

View Cite on Web

The authority that allows the Coast Guard to conduct marine casualty investigations 

on commercial vessels also allows investigations on recreational vessels. All 

jurisdictional boundaries are the same. In general, as the Coast Guard does not have 

the resources available, these investigations are deferred to the state; however, there 

are some instances in which either the state does not conduct boating accident

investigations or they do not have jurisdiction (i.e. federal waterways). In these cases, 

the Coast Guard conducts the investigation. 

G. AUTHORITY TO CONDUCT PORTS AND WATERWAYS SAFETY 

INVESTIGATIONS

In addition to marine casualty investigations and pollution investigations, this statute 

allows the Coast Guard general geographic jurisdiction. This jurisdiction covers 

investigations occurring in the ports, harbors, or navigable waters of the United 

States. (See D.2. above.)
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART A: ADMINISTRATION

CHAPTER 2: AUTHORITY FOR INVESTIGATION 

A2-6 

H.1. 46 USC

2103

SUPERINTENDENCE OF 

THE MERCHANT 

MARINE

View Cite on Web

H.2. 46 USC

7701 TO 7707 –

ADMINISTRATIVE 

PROCEDURE

View Cite on Web

The authority for personnel investigations is found in 33 USC Chapter 77 and 46 

CFR Part 5. 

H.3. 46 USC

7705 – SUBPOENAS 

AND OATHS

View Cite on Web

H. AUTHORITY TO CONDUCT PERSONNEL INVESTIGATIONS

46 USC 2103 provides the Secretary with broad authority over superintendence of 

the merchant marine and involved personnel, and to enforce the laws with respect to 

vessels and seamen.

This cite establishes that those officials designated to investigate or preside at a 

hearing on matters that are grounds for suspension and revocation have the authority 

to administer oaths and issue subpoenas. 

I. AUTHORITY TO CONDUCT CIVIL PENALTY INVESTIGATIONS

I.1. AUTHORITY Various laws and regulations give the Coast Guard the authority to issue civil 

penalties for violations of the law. The regulation governing civil penalty reporting 

and investigation is 33 CFR 1.07-10 (View Cite on Web) and calls for Coast Guard 

personnel to investigate or evaluate apparent violations. 

Remember you do not have the authority to issue subpoenas or administer oaths 

unless authorized by statute and/or you are properly delegated that authority. 
USCG Marine Safety Manual 

Volume V: Investigations and Enforcement

PART A: ADMINISTRATION 

 

Chapter Three: 

Overarching Policies
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART A: ADMINISTRATION

CHAPTER 3: OVERARCHING POLICIES

A3-i 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

A. MARINE INVESTIGATIONS PROGRAM VISION AND MISSION . 1

A.1. VISION .............................................................................................................................................................................1

A.2. MISSION...........................................................................................................................................................................1

B. COMMITMENT TO PROFESSIONALISM ................. 1

B.1. INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................................................................................1

B.2. DEMEANOR ......................................................................................................................................................................1

B.3. LEGAL RIGHTS OF CITIZENS .............................................................................................................................................1

B.4. ATTITUDE.........................................................................................................................................................................1

B.5. IMPARTIALITY ..................................................................................................................................................................1

B.6. DISCRETION .....................................................................................................................................................................2

B.6.a. Press and Public.......................................................................................................................................................2

B.6.b. Other Investigators or Agencies...............................................................................................................................2

C. SAFETY OF COAST GUARD PERSONNEL ............... 2

C.1. INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................................................................................2

C.2. FORCE PROTECTION .........................................................................................................................................................2

C.3. TWO PERSON INVESTIGATIVE TEAMS...............................................................................................................................2

C.4. SAFE WORK PRACTICES ...................................................................................................................................................2

D. ENFORCEMENT STANCE AND RELATIONSHIP TO RESPONSE 

ACTIVITIES DURING A MARINE INVESTIGATION............ 3

D.1. GENERAL .........................................................................................................................................................................3

D.2. STATEMENTS TO WITNESSES............................................................................................................................................3

D.3. NO PRESUMPTION OF CRIMINAL ACTIVITY ......................................................................................................................3

D.4. QUESTIONS ABOUT THE PURPOSE OF AN INVESTIGATION.................................................................................................3

D.5. RELEASE OF REPORTS OF INVESTIGATION WHEN A CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION IS ONGOING............................................4

D.6. TAINTING OF CRIMINAL PROSECUTION CASES.................................................................................................................4

D.7. COOPERATION DURING RESPONSE EFFORTS ....................................................................................................................4

D.8. COAST GUARD RESPONSIBILITY FOR RESPONSE AND INVESTIGATION.............................................................................4

D.9. REQUEST FOR ATTORNEYS DURING A RESPONSE .............................................................................................................4

D.10. REQUEST FOR ATTORNEYS DURING A MARINE INVESTIGATION.....................................................................................4

D.11. APPROACH TO ON-SCENE REFUSALS TO ANSWER QUESTIONS.......................................................................................4

D.12. MIRANDA WARNINGS ....................................................................................................................................................5

D.13. SUBPOENAS FOR RELUCTANT WITNESSES......................................................................................................................5

D.14. APPROACH TO INVALID USE OF FIFTH AMENDMENT PROTECTION.................................................................................5

D.15. OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE..............................................................................................................................................5

D.16. ATTORNEY INTERFERENCE DURING THE INVESTIGATION...............................................................................................5

D.17. ATTORNEY DEMANDS TO BE PRESENT DURING INTERVIEW OF NON-CLIENTS ...............................................................5

D.18. APPROACH TO ATTORNEYS ON-SCENE DURING MARINE CASUALTY INVESTIGATIONS ..................................................6

E. SUBPOENAS ................................. 6

E.1. GENERAL..........................................................................................................................................................................6

E.2. 14 USC 89 INVESTIGATIONS.............................................................................................................................................7

E.3. SERVICE OF SUBPOENAS...................................................................................................................................................7

E.3.a. Compel the Appearance of a Respondent or Witness to an Interview or Hearing ...................................................7
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART A: ADMINISTRATION

CHAPTER 3: OVERARCHING POLICIES

A3-ii 

E.3.b. Service On Foreign Persons.....................................................................................................................................7

E.3.c. Compel the Production of Evidence .........................................................................................................................7

E.3.d. Subpoenas and Cooperative Witnesses ....................................................................................................................8

E.4. PAYMENT OF WITNESSES .................................................................................................................................................8

E.5. FORCE PROTECTION WHILE SERVING SUBPOENAS ...........................................................................................................8

E.6. ENFORCEMENT OF SUBPOENAS.........................................................................................................................................9

E.7. SUBPOENA CONSISTENCY.................................................................................................................................................9

F. COOPERATION WITH OTHER UNITS/AGENCIES .......... 9

F.1. INTERNAL AND EXTERNAL REFERRALS ............................................................................................................................9

F.2. FEDERAL LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES ........................................................................................................................9

F.2.a. General.....................................................................................................................................................................9

F.2.b. Use of Force Policy................................................................................................................................................10

F.3. STATE AND LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES .......................................................................................................10

F.3.a. General...................................................................................................................................................................10

F.3.b. Cultivating Relationships .......................................................................................................................................10

F.3.c. Conduct of Criminal Law Enforcement. .................................................................................................................10

F.4. FOREIGN GOVERNMENTS................................................................................................................................................10

F.4.a. General...................................................................................................................................................................10

F.4.b. Interference with or by Foreign Governments .......................................................................................................10

F.5. FOREIGN MERCHANT MARINERS ....................................................................................................................................11

F.5.a. Foreign Merchant Mariners...................................................................................................................................11

F.5.b. Remedial Action against Foreign Merchant Mariners...........................................................................................11

F.6. NATIONAL TRANSPORTATION SAFETY BOARD (NTSB) .................................................................................................11

F.7. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (DOI) / MINERALS MANAGEMENT SERVICE (MMS)...................................................11

F.7.a. Coast Guard and MMS Responsibilities.................................................................................................................11

F.7.b. Investigative Lead...................................................................................................................................................12

F.8. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE (DOJ)....................................................................................................................................12

F.8.a. Referral for Criminal Enforcement Action.............................................................................................................12

F.8.b. “6(e) List”..............................................................................................................................................................12

F.9. FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION (FBI) ..................................................................................................................12

F.9.a. Coast Guard and FBI Responsibilities...................................................................................................................12

F.9.b. Investigative Lead...................................................................................................................................................13

F.10. BUREAU OF ALCOHOL TOBACCO AND FIREARMS (ATF)................................................................................................13

F.11. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE (DOD) ...............................................................................................................................13

F.11.a. Coordination – General .......................................................................................................................................13

F.11.b. Navy and MSC Vessels.........................................................................................................................................13

F.11.c. Contract Operated United States Naval Ship (USNS) Vessels .............................................................................13

F.11.d. Disciplinary Action...............................................................................................................................................14

F.12. THE DEPARTMENT OF LABOR/OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH ADMINISTRATION (OSHA)..............................14

F.12.a. Shipyard and Harbor Worker Accidents ..............................................................................................................14

F.12.b. Outer Continental Shelf Activity Accidents ..........................................................................................................14

F.12.c. Commercial Diving Accidents involving Inspected Vessels and Platforms..........................................................15

F.12.d. Commercial Diving Accidents involving Uninspected Vessels.............................................................................15

G. THE IMO CODE FOR THE INVESTIGATION OF MARINE 

CASUALTIES AND INCIDENTS ........................ 15

G.1. COOPERATION AND COORDINATION ..............................................................................................................................15

G.2. THE IMO CODE..............................................................................................................................................................15

G.2.a. The IMO Code........................................................................................................................................................15

G.2.b. Adoption of the Code..............................................................................................................................................15
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART A: ADMINISTRATION

CHAPTER 3: OVERARCHING POLICIES

A3-iii 

G.2.c. Mechanism for Cooperation...................................................................................................................................16

G.3. FLAG AND PORT STATE OBLIGATIONS TO INVESTIGATE ................................................................................................16

G.3.a. Joint Investigation..................................................................................................................................................16

G.3.b. Independent Investigations ....................................................................................................................................16

G.4. SHARING OF DRAFT REPORTS OF INVESTIGATION (ROIS)..............................................................................................16

G.5. POINTS OF CONTACT FOR THE UNITED STATES ..............................................................................................................16

G.6. IO RESPONSIBILITIES .....................................................................................................................................................16

H. LABOR – MANAGEMENT DISPUTES ................. 17

H.1. GENERAL .......................................................................................................................................................................17

H.2. WORK/REST SCHEDULES AND FATIGUE.........................................................................................................................17

H.3. CONTROL OF THE INVESTIGATION..................................................................................................................................17

I. MERCHANT MARINER’S RECORD/WANTED LIST ......... 17

I.1. General ...........................................................................................................................................................................17

I.2. Information to be Included in Merchant Mariner’s Record............................................................................................17

I.3. Reasons for Locking or Unlocking a Merchant Mariner’s Record.................................................................................18

I.4. Placing Merchant Mariners on the Wanted List .............................................................................................................18

I.5. Sending Information to, Locking, and Unlocking a Merchant Mariner’s Record ..........................................................19

J. INFORMATION/OTHER RESOURCES ................. 19

J.1. General...........................................................................................................................................................................19

J.2. NCIC/NLETS General ...................................................................................................................................................20

J.3. NCIC/NLETS POLICY ....................................................................................................................................................20

J.4. PREREQUISITES FOR REQUESTING ACCESS TO NCIC/NLETS.........................................................................................20

J.5. ACCEPTABLE USE OF NCIC/NLETS...............................................................................................................................20

J.6. UNACCEPTABLE USE OF NCIC/NLETS..........................................................................................................................21

J.7. RAMIFICATIONS FOR AND EXAMPLES OF UNAUTHORIZED OR IMPROPER USE OF NCIC/NLETS.....................................21

J.8. ACCESSING AND TERMINATING ACCESS NCIC/NLETS..................................................................................................21

J.9. LOCATING PEOPLE ..........................................................................................................................................................21

J.10. COMMANDANT (CG-545) INVESTIGATIONS “GO TEAM” .........................................................................................21

J.11. INTELLIGENCE COORDINATION CENTER (ICC) .............................................................................................................22
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART A: ADMINISTRATION

CHAPTER 3: OVERARCHING POLICIES

A3-1 

A.1. VISION

A.2. MISSION

B.1.

INTRODUCTION

B.2. DEMEANOR

B.3. LEGAL 

RIGHTS OF CITIZENS

B.4. ATTITUDE

B.5.

IMPARTIALITY

A. MARINE INVESTIGATIONS PROGRAM VISION AND MISSION

The Coast Guard will investigate marine incidents; recommend corrective actions 

that reduce recurrences; take all appropriate administrative, civil, and criminal 

enforcement action required for a given incident; and assure the collection and 

dissemination of the highest quality information on marine casualties, injuries, 

pollution, marine violations, and personnel actions. 

The Marine Investigations Program investigates deaths, injuries, property loss, 

and environmental damage to determine the associated human performance, 

equipment, and environmental causal factors; investigates merchant mariner 

negligence, misconduct, incompetence, and dangerous drug use leading to 

appropriate remedial MMC suspension or revocation; investigates criminal and civil 

offenses for assessment of civil penalties or referral for criminal prosecution; analyzes 

trends and risks in the maritime industries. 

B. COMMITMENT TO PROFESSIONALISM

The Coast Guard has earned an excellent reputation as the world’s premier marine 

safety organization. In order to maintain the high level of performance that led to 

this reputation, all marine safety personnel must make a personal commitment to 

professionalism in all aspects of their duties. Investigating Officers (IO) shall 

maintain the highest standards of ethical conduct as law enforcement officers and 

public servants. 

IOs must not display a narrow, rigid, or arbitrary application of the law. IOs must 

always remember that no action should be taken without considering whether it is 

truly in the public interest. 

IO’s must afford every person involved in an investigation his or her legal rights and 

respect the dignity of every human being. IOs should not condone violations of the 

law, but the proper target of their efforts is the behavior, not the person. 

IOs must be courteous and professional. The Coast Guard depends on the lawabiding public for information. IOs can only obtain this information in an 

atmosphere of cooperation in the interest of marine safety. IOs must believe in the 

policies of the Marine Investigation Program, and must convince the public of the 

program’s value. Courtesy and tact are the keys to achieving public cooperation. The 

best possible relationship with the public and mariners is through courtesy, fairness, 

and impartiality without sacrificing professional dignity and integrity, even under the 

strongest provocation. IOs are ambassadors of the Marine Safety program and 

should promote its goals. 

IOs must have a fair and impartial attitude toward matters under investigation, and 

must not be influenced by political, economic, or social considerations. Further, IOs 

must be careful not to let past professional experiences or regulatory agendas bias 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART A: ADMINISTRATION

CHAPTER 3: OVERARCHING POLICIES

A3-2 

their views or the investigation. Allowing such biases will compromise the factfinding and policy feedback purposes of the investigation. The fact-finding and 

analysis stages of the investigation should remain two separate stages of the 

investigation to eliminate or reduce bias. IOs must be cautious in their remarks and 

actions during the course of an investigation, keeping in mind that remarks, actions, 

and motives can easily be misinterpreted by the public. 

B.6. DISCRETION B.6.a. Press and Public

B.6.b. Other Investigators or Agencies 

C.1.

INTRODUCTION

C.2. FORCE 

PROTECTION

C.3. TWO PERSON 

INVESTIGATIVE 

TEAMS

As a matter of policy, IOs shall, wherever operational limitations permit, deploy to 

the field investigative teams consisting of at least two individuals. Two person teams 

allow for greatly increased safety and security, as well as improving the quality of onscene investigation. 

C.4. SAFE WORK 

PRACTICES

Investigations are not strictly confidential, and IOs may release information 

reasonably demonstrated to be factual to the press or public. IOs must carefully 

observe, however, the provisions of the Privacy Act and the Freedom of Information 

Act (FOIA) in these releases. Coast Guard personnel shall not disclose the names of 

individuals employed on any vessel who provide information about defects and 

imperfections in matters subject to regulation and inspection (46 USC 3315(b)). To 

do so subjects an IO to significant penalties. 

IOs can benefit from discussing cases with other investigators, particularly more 

experienced investigators. IOs should be cautious, however, in discussing cases with 

personnel outside the Coast Guard, even when the Coast Guard is cooperating with 

other agencies in the investigation. Discussions should avoid speculation, opinion, 

and the Coast Guard’s strategy in the investigation. 

C. SAFETY OF COAST GUARD PERSONNEL

The safety of USCG personnel involved in Marine Safety operations must always be a 

paramount concern. While a reasonable measure of risk-taking is inherent in our 

service, IOs must take all reasonable steps to maintain personal safety, including 

adhering to minimum safe work practices and other policy respectively contained 

within the Marine Safety Manual, Volume I, Chapter 10 and subsequent appendices 

(CIM 16000.6) and the Safety and Environmental Health Manual (CIM 5100.47). 

Virtually all Marine Safety activities conducted during an investigation occur with the 

consent of the vessel’s master or facility manager and are cordial. In some situations, 

however, IOs may encounter significant hostility. If any IO believes that they or any 

other Marine Safety personnel will be in jeopardy in any way, they should discontinue 

the on-scene investigation until appropriate steps to ensure safety have been taken. 

To enlist full command support for the Safety and Occupational Heath program, 

each district and command is authorized to develop controls (safe work practices) 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART A: ADMINISTRATION

CHAPTER 3: OVERARCHING POLICIES

A3-3 

D.1. GENERAL

D.2. STATEMENTS 

TO WITNESSES

suited to the unit’s specific needs encompassing, but not limited to, all on-scene 

activities conducted by IOs. 

D. ENFORCEMENT STANCE AND RELATIONSHIP TO RESPONSE ACTIVITIES DURING A MARINE 

INVESTIGATION

Generally speaking, marine casualty investigations that uncover criminal activity do 

not change the process by which marine investigations are conducted. The same 

findings of fact are collected and evidence is gathered. Specific issues that come up 

when potential criminal activity is detected are covered below. From a response 

stance, marine casualty investigations are secondary to the saving of life at sea, 

protection of property, and protection of the marine environment. An investigation 

should never supersede or impinge upon search and rescue or pollution response 

activities, but must be carried on concurrently. Many investigation activities, 

particularly those for pollution investigation, are integrated and required parts of 

pollution response. Further, many investigation activities (such as securing the scene 

of the incident or directing drug and alcohol testing) are time-critical, and must 

receive the appropriate priority during a pollution response or search and rescue 

operation. IOs should ensure that their time-critical needs are included in the 

standard incident response protocols. 

Various industry representatives and lawyers have alleged that the Coast Guard 

attempts to lull mariners and other maritime personnel into a false sense of security 

with words to the effect of “this is not a criminal inquiry,” or “This is just an 

investigation for cause.” Such statements are misleading and shall be avoided. 

Under no circumstances should an IO “cut a deal” with crewmembers or their 

attorneys to gain assistance. Similarly, Coast Guard personnel must not make any 

representation as to a possible grant of immunity. Only certain Department of 

Justice (DOJ) personnel can grant immunity. Only the District Commander can 

decide whether to refer a case for criminal prosecution. 

D.3. NO 

PRESUMPTION OF 

CRIMINAL ACTIVITY

D.4. QUESTIONS 

ABOUT THE PURPOSE 

OF AN 

INVESTIGATION

IOs shall bear in mind that one of the purposes outlined in 46 USC 6301 is to 

determine “whether there is evidence that a criminal act under the laws of the United 

States has been committed, so that the matter may be referred to appropriate 

authorities for prosecution.” It is important to stress that Coast Guard investigators 

should not begin its investigation with a presumption one way or the other as to 

criminal acts. 

IOs should cite the specific authority that they are acting under (sometimes several) 

when asked as to the purposes of an investigation. If asked about the possibility of 

criminal liability by a witness or involved person before or during a interview, the IO 

should respond with words to the effect that “the Coast Guard is free to choose civil, 

criminal, or administrative enforcement when an apparent violation is detected, and 

any decision to take one type of action does not preclude another type of action.” 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART A: ADMINISTRATION

CHAPTER 3: OVERARCHING POLICIES

A3-4 

D.5. RELEASE OF 

REPORTS OF 

INVESTIGATION WHEN 

A CRIMINAL 

INVESTIGATION IS 

ONGOING

D.6. TAINTING OF 

CRIMINAL 

PROSECUTION CASES

D.7. COOPERATION 

DURING RESPONSE 

EFFORTS

D.8. COAST GUARD 

RESPONSIBILITY FOR 

RESPONSE AND 

INVESTIGATION

D.9. REQUEST FOR 

ATTORNEYS DURING A 

RESPONSE

D.10. REQUEST 

FOR ATTORNEYS 

DURING A MARINE 

INVESTIGATION

D.11. APPROACH 

TO ON-SCENE 

REFUSALS TO ANSWER 

QUESTIONS

In general, investigations under this volume that have an associated criminal

investigation shall be kept open and shall not be released either internally or to the 

public until such time as the District Commander and criminal prosecutors give 

clearance to close and release the case. 

Because an IO cannot know at the outset whether evidence of criminal act will be 

encountered in any given case (unless the criminal act is evident, such as murder), 

IOs must pursue all investigations with such techniques and practices as guarantee 

that evidence collected and facts uncovered will not taint any future criminal 

prosecution. This applies in all cases, regardless of the Coast Guard’s initial reason 

for investigation. The procedures outlined in Part B of this volume for fact-finding 

will assist in protecting evidence for such purposes. 

Response personnel arriving at the scene of a Marine Casualty involving an actual or 

potential environmental incident should consider that crewmembers face an unusual 

situation. On one hand, if crewmembers provide full cooperation and information to 

Coast Guard personnel, any statements they make could be used in potential criminal, 

civil or administrative proceedings. On the other hand, failure to cooperate in the 

response could expose their employer to potential civil penalties, or loss of defenses 

or limits of liability in civil cases. 

IOs must recognize that the situation faced by the crew does not in any way affect 

the Coast Guard’s responsibility to respond (including gaining cooperation of the 

crew to assist) and/or to fully investigate the incident and take appropriate action. 

The investigation should only be delayed in order to best meet immediate response 

concerns The investigation should not be suspended or delayed because of the crew’s 

situation. 

If an individual requests that an attorney be present prior to answering any questions 

during a response, Coast Guard personnel should contact their servicing SJA office. 

The IO should advise the witness that they are free to consult their own attorney on 

matters prior to giving testimony. Wherever possible, a mutually agreed upon time 

and place offering reasonable opportunity to consult with an attorney should be 

arranged. Such delay for consultation should be reasonable given the ready 

availability of attorneys. 

If the circumstances described above occur on-scene, this does not mean the Coast 

Guard must stop asking reluctant crewmembers for assistance or stop asking 

questions. IOs may continue asking questions of reluctant crewmembers just as they 

would a cooperative crewmember. However, IOs should not single out, harass or 

badger reluctant crewmembers. Further, any attempt to encourage a reluctant 

crewmember to participate in a response or investigation should not be in the form 

of a threat of subsequent prosecution or other action. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART A: ADMINISTRATION

CHAPTER 3: OVERARCHING POLICIES

A3-5 

D.12. MIRANDA 

WARNINGS

D.13. SUBPOENAS 

FOR RELUCTANT 

WITNESSES

D.14. APPROACH 

TO INVALID USE OF 

FIFTH AMENDMENT 

PROTECTION

D.15.

OBSTRUCTION OF 

JUSTICE

D.16. ATTORNEY 

INTERFERENCE 

DURING THE 

INVESTIGATION

The Coast Guard can direct attorneys not to interfere with response or investigative 

efforts in accordance with 18 USC 1505 and 18 USC 1512. However: 

 1. Attorneys cannot be prevented from advising their client(s), and 

Miranda warnings are not normally required during marine casualty investigations. 

Miranda warnings are only required when a suspect is in custody and subject to 

interrogation. Courts have routinely held that routine Coast Guard boardings 

(including marine casualty investigations) are not custodial, thus Miranda does not 

apply. The servicing Legal Office should be contacted for further guidance as 

to when Miranda warnings are required. Also see Chapter 3 of the U.S. Coast 

Guard Maritime Law Enforcement Manual, COMDTINST M16247.1 (series). 

Before interrogating a witness in a custodial situation, IOs shall administer Miranda 

Warnings and scrupulously observe the witnesses’ right to counsel. 

Reluctant witnesses may be subpoenaed to give testimony at a time and place 

convenient to the IO. Such subpoenas should be issued, however, only when the IO 

and the Command are willing to enforce such subpoenas. See Section F below for 

more information. 

When the IO believes that an individual is inappropriately asserting a Fifth 

Amendment protection for testimony, the IO should contact the servicing Legal 

Office. Although highly unusual, when the situation warrants the use of resources, an 

order may be sought from the federal district court directing the person to testify. 

Similarly, when appropriate, DOJ may grant immunity thereby voiding Fifth 

Amendment protection issues. 

A crewmember or attorney who fails to provide information or assistance should not 

be considered to be obstructing justice. However, if field personnel feel a situation is 

rising to the level of obstruction of justice, contact the servicing Legal Office prior to 

taking any action. 

 2. The Investigating officer should consult their servicing legal office concerning 

appropriate measures for controlling the investigation. 

D.17. ATTORNEY 

DEMANDS TO BE 

PRESENT DURING 

INTERVIEW OF NONCLIENTS

In general, exclusion of any person including an attorney is inappropriate. Members 

of the press and public may in general be excluded from all or a portion of an 

interview when: 

The IO reasonably expects the witness to act as an informant pursuant to 46 USC 

3315; or 

The IO has specific and documented evidence that the person is disrupting the 

course of the investigation (i.e., exclusion is necessary to maintain control of the 

investigation). 

The IO may avoid any conflict with witness interviews by conducting them at a Coast 

Guard facility rather than on-scene. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART A: ADMINISTRATION

CHAPTER 3: OVERARCHING POLICIES

A3-6 

D.18. APPROACH 

TO ATTORNEYS ONSCENE DURING 

MARINE CASUALTY 

INVESTIGATIONS

In the event an attorney is already on board and has advised his or her client not to 

speak to the Coast Guard when IO arrives, the following actions should be taken: 

Obtain the name of the attorney. 

Ask the attorney for the identity of crewmembers, employees or corporations he or 

she is representing. Try to verify that the client agrees to this representation.

Sometimes, a company may dispatch an attorney to the scene who claims to represent 

the company and the entire crew. Such joint representation may be a conflict of 

interest. Where the investigating officer identifies a potential conflict, they should 

contact their servicing legal office for assistance before discussing the matter with the 

attorney. 

Inform the attorney of the provisions of Coast Guard responsibilities during

responses and investigations as above. 

Call the servicing Legal Office if an attorney representing the one crewmember or the 

company demands to be present during interviews with other crewmembers. 

The Coast Guard may not remove an attorney from the scene unless he or she is 

physically impeding the response. 

E. SUBPOENAS

E.1. General One of the most powerful tools that an Investigating Officer (IO) has is the 

subpoena. Subpoena authority is granted under various statutes. They are as follows: 

33 USC 1227 (Waterfront Facility Casualties) 

33 USC 1321 (Pollution Incidents) 

33 USC 1907 (MARPOL Violations) 

E.1. GENERAL 43 USC 1348 (OCS Casualties) 

46 USC 6304 (Marine Casualties) 

46 USC 7705 (S&R Investigations) 

An IO can issue a subpoena during an investigation (at any level except preliminary) 

provided that the authority for the investigation is derived from one of the authorities 

listed above. An extreme example of the power of the subpoena would be a situation 

in which an IO (with exceptional reasons) issues a subpoena to a vessel master or 

agent to provide access to the vessel at a reasonable location at a specific time for 

examination by an IO. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART A: ADMINISTRATION

CHAPTER 3: OVERARCHING POLICIES

A3-7 

E.2. 14 USC 89

INVESTIGATIONS

E.3. SERVICE OF 

SUBPOENAS

E.3.a. Compel the Appearance of a Respondent or Witness to an Interview or 

Hearing 

Whenever the IO has reason to believe that a witness or respondent will not appear 

voluntarily at the stated time and location of an interview or hearing, a subpoena 

should be served. The subpoena should be prepared in duplicate; the original for 

service and the duplicate copy showing the date and place of service, and signature (if 

witness will sign) or fact that the original was delivered by certified mail, with return 

receipt signed by the addressee only. The duplicate copy of the subpoena or certified 

mail receipt may be used in evidence if the witness fails to appear. If the subpoena is 

not served, a written statement shall be provided, including information from the 

U.S. Postal Service, explaining the non-delivery and the reasons for failure to serve. 

E.3.b. Service On Foreign Persons 

The Coast Guard is authorized to conduct investigations under its general law 

enforcement authorities (ex: security incidents). Coast Guard Officer, Petty Officers 

and Warrant Officers posses 14 USC 89a authority at all time when on board a vessel 

in addition to any specific authority they may have to investigate under the statues 

listed in paragraph E.1. 

The Coast Guard's subpoena power extends to foreign nationals within U.S. 

jurisdiction. These persons occasionally refuse to appear or testify before a Marine 

Board of Investigation (Marine Board) or an IO, believing that they are not 

answerable. In such cases, the Marine Board recorder or the IO should present all 

facts, including copies of the subpoena(s) issued, to their servicing Legal Office. The 

servicing legal office may coordinate with Customs and Border Patrol (CBP) to 

prevent the individual’s departure from the U.S. under 8 CFR §215 . The servicing 

legal office may also coordinate with the U.S. attorney to seek a “show cause” order 

from the cognizant federal district court which would require the individual to 

comply with the subpoena. 

E.3.c. Compel the Production of Evidence 

The Marine Board and IO are empowered by 46 USC 6304 to require production of 

books, papers, documents and any other evidence. When such evidence is desired, a 

subpoena shall be served upon the custodian(s) of such material. The material should 

be described in sufficient detail as to be readily identifiable. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART A: ADMINISTRATION

CHAPTER 3: OVERARCHING POLICIES

A3-8 

E.3.d. Subpoenas and Cooperative Witnesses 

E.4. PAYMENT OF 

WITNESSES

E.5. FORCE 

PROTECTION WHILE 

SERVING SUBPOENAS

Oftentimes there is a question of personal safety while service subpoenas in person. 

When in-person service is necessary (instead of certified mail service), force 

protection must always be considered. The following is a list of force protection 

options in order of preference: 

ABOARD VESSELS: 

IOs, properly qualified and equipped IAW the U.S. Coast Guard Maritime Law 

Enforcement Manual, COMDTINST M16247.1 (series) to carry firearms; 

Accompanying armed boarding team members ; properly qualified and equipped 

IAW the U.S. Coast Guard Maritime Law Enforcement Manual, COMDTINST 

M16247.1 (series); 

ASHORE: 

Accompanying Coast Guard Investigative Service agents; and 

It is sometimes in the interest of the Coast Guard to subpoena cooperative witnesses, 

as a witness under subpoena is in a more favorable position under the laws relating to 

the protection of witnesses. Individuals under subpoena are usually less reluctant to 

give testimony detrimental to friends or relatives or in some way derogatory to 

themselves. Furthermore, some private agencies (such as drug testing consortiums) 

routinely require subpoenas for the production of their records, as a protection to 

themselves. Additionally, some employers require a subpoena before they will permit 

an employee to miss work in order to testify. 

A notation of the time and date of service shall be made by the serving officer. When 

the witness appears, the Marine Board recorder or IO shall endorse the original 

subpoena to show the time and place that the witness participated to substantiate the 

claim for payment. The witness should also complete Claim for Fees and Mileage of 

Witness, SF-1157 in order that the recorder or IO may process it for reimbursement. 

Funds for reimbursement should come from the investigation convening authority. 

In cases where the person subpoenaed resides far from the location of the hearing or 

the person's financial position makes the person reluctant to appear, government 

transportation requests may be issued to furnish transportation. [NOTE: Although a 

subpoena can be enforced judicially only within the jurisdiction of the federal district 

court, payments for witnesses' travel beyond the limits of the judicial district are not

prohibited.] 

Accompanying other federal, state, or local law enforcement agents. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART A: ADMINISTRATION

CHAPTER 3: OVERARCHING POLICIES

A3-9 

E.6. ENFORCEMENT 

OF SUBPOENAS

When serving a subpoena, the IO should ensure that a reasonable request is made 

and the person has a reasonable period of time to comply. When an IO is 

conducting the investigation and when no enforcement action is ongoing, the IO 

should contact the servicing Legal Office if a subpoena is ignored. The legal officer 

may seek enforcement of the subpoena through the cognizant federal district court. 

E.7. SUBPOENA 

CONSISTENCY

F.1. INTERNAL 

AND EXTERNAL 

REFERRALS

When referring a case to or requesting internal assistance from another Coast Guard 

unit during the course of an investigation (e.g. CGIS assistance, over-flights, or other 

CG platforms), the request should be via the District Commander. 

In cases where a marine casualty or incident may have been caused by criminal acts or 

criminal negligence, the CGIS should be contacted as soon as possible, particularly if 

the collection of evidence from electronic shipboard equipment, such as computers, 

GPS, LORAN, etc., is being considered. The CGIS has special agents specially 

trained and equipped to conduct forensic analysis and exploitation of computers and 

other electronics media for evidentiary value. 

When referring a case or requesting assistance external to the Coast Guard during the 

course of an investigation (e.g. FBI, EPA, or other agencies), the request shall be to 

Commandant (CG-545) via the District Commander. This includes participation in 

multi-agency task forces when sharing Coast Guard information with other agencies 

and/or requesting assistance or offering Coast Guard action. 

During an S&R proceeding, the enforcement of a subpoena after the investigation is 

directed by the Administrative Law Judge (ALJ). The ALJ will issue an order to 

comply, and if that order is ignored the enforcement process will be the same as 

described above. 

All subpoenas to be issued from a unit SHALL be reviewed and released by the 

Senior Investigating Officer (SIO) or other senior-level single individual authorized 

by the Commanding Officer for consistency, regardless as to whether the subpoena is 

being issued by the OCMI or the COTP. 

F. COOPERATION WITH OTHER UNITS/AGENCIES

F.2. FEDERAL LAW 

ENFORCEMENT 

AGENCIES

F.2.a. General 

Under 14 USC 141 the USCG may assist federal, state, and local authorities in 

executing their responsibilities in areas where USCG personnel are especially 

qualified. In turn, the USCG may request assistance from these agencies. There is 

no requirement to provide the requested assistance merely because USCG resources 

are available. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART A: ADMINISTRATION

CHAPTER 3: OVERARCHING POLICIES

A3-10 

F.2.b. Use of Force Policy 

F.3. STATE AND 

LOCAL LAW 

ENFORCEMENT 

AGENCIES

F.3.a. General 

F.3.b. Cultivating Relationships 

F.3.c. Conduct of Criminal Law Enforcement. 

F.4. FOREIGN 

GOVERNMENTS

F.4.a. General 

F.4.b. Interference with or by Foreign Governments 

In all situations in which Marine Safety personnel assist other federal, state or local 

agencies, the appropriate operational commander shall ensure that Coast Guard 

personnel are cognizant of and comply with the Coast Guard Use of Force Policy, 

regardless of the policy of the assisted agency. The Coast Guard Use of Force Policy 

can be found in the Maritime Law Enforcement Manual, COMDTINST M16247.1 

(series). 

Marine Safety personnel should not normally undertake law enforcement activities 

under the sole state/local jurisdiction except to provide state or local officers 

assistance so that these officers may execute their duties. 

IOs should cultivate relationships with State and Local Law Enforcement Agencies in 

order to foster interagency cooperation. A boating under the influence violation, for 

instance, is a violation of federal law as well as local and state laws. In this instance, 

the interests of Marine Safety are best served by the coordinated action of the Coast 

Guard and State or local agencies. 

All investigations and referral of criminal offenses shall be conducted in accordance 

with the guidance in Part C of this volume regardless of interagency coordination. 

When conducting investigations that involve the need to contact foreign 

governments, field units should request the assistance of Commandant (CG-545) via 

the District Commander. Commandant (CG-545) can be reached during the 

workday at (202) 372-1029, and after hours through the Coast Guard Command 

Center at (800) DAD-SAFE. As a matter of policy, the Coast Guard will conduct the 

appropriate level of enforcement action against foreign vessels, companies, operators, 

etc., under U.S. law prior to referring the matter to the flag state.

Coast Guard personnel must never interfere with legitimate foreign law enforcement. 

Any communication with foreign law enforcement personnel should be reported via 

the chain of command and may require notification of the State Department and/or 

activation of the Maritime Operational Threat Response (MOTR) plan in accordance 

with Appendix D of the U.S. Coast Guard Maritime Law Enforcement Manual, 

COMDTINST M16247.1 (series). IOs should exercise extreme sensitivity when 

conducting investigations in the territorial seas or jurisdiction of foreign countries and 

should not undertake such activities without consulting with the appropriate servicing 

Legal Office.
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART A: ADMINISTRATION

CHAPTER 3: OVERARCHING POLICIES

A3-11 

F.5. FOREIGN 

MERCHANT MARINERS

F.5.a. Foreign Merchant Mariners 

When an incident involves a foreign merchant mariner, the IO may find flag 

administration participation in the investigation to be beneficial. Foreign mariners 

may be more willing to respond to the IO’s questions when they believe their 

participation will have consequences in their home country. 

F.5.b. Remedial Action against Foreign Merchant Mariners 

The Coast Guard often lacks jurisdiction over the credentials of foreign Merchant 

Mariners. In the event that the investigative process uncovers evidence of 

misconduct or negligence on that mariner’s part, remedial action alternatives are 

relatively few. If the specific misconduct is in violation of applicable federal laws or 

regulation, the Coast Guard may pursue criminal prosecution or civil penalties, 

depending upon the infraction. Negligent operation of a vessel, for instance, carries 

both criminal and civil penalties under 46 USC 2302. 

F.6. NATIONAL 

TRANSPORTATION 

SAFETY BOARD 

(NTSB) 

If, as in many cases, the misconduct or negligence carries no penalty under U.S. law 

or was committed outside of the United States’ jurisdiction, the IO should take any 

enforcement action legally available (if any) and refer the matter to the flag state via 

the District Commander and Commandant (CG-545). 

Both the Coast Guard and the NTSB have jurisdiction to investigate major marine 

casualties. In an effort to objectively distinguish which agency should have lead 

during the investigation of a major marine casualty, the Coast Guard created a tool 

called the “brightline.” The brightline determines how much and how recent was the 

last Coast Guard contact/control over a vessel involved in a casualty. When it is 

determined that there was sufficient Coast Guard contact within a recent time period, 

the NTSB will generally take lead in the investigation. The brightline is used solely by 

Commandant (CG-545) while consulting with NTSB about a major marine casualty. 

Units are not to undertake direct notification of NTSB or calculation/use of the 

brightline. Commandant (CG-545) will coordinate contact with NTSB for all issues. 

A unit shall never contact NTSB directly without authorization from Commandant 

(CG-545). 

F.7. DEPARTMENT 

OF THE INTERIOR 

(DOI) / MINERALS 

MANAGEMENT SERVICE 

(MMS) 

F.7.a. Coast Guard and MMS Responsibilities 

Both the Coast Guard and the DOI's Minerals Management Service (MMS) (formerly 

the Conservation Division, U.S. Geological Survey) have jurisdiction to investigate 

casualties occurring on structures on the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS). The 

CG/MMS Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) of 30 September 2004, and the 

regulations governing OCS policy (33 CFR 140-147), provide guidance for 

conducting investigations of this nature. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART A: ADMINISTRATION

CHAPTER 3: OVERARCHING POLICIES

A3-12 

F.7.b. Investigative Lead 

Investigations should be conducted so as to avoid a duplication of effort. However, 

the Coast Guard and MMS have differing responsibilities. A Coast Guard report is 

required for those incidents meeting the requirements of 33 CFR 140.201, 33 CFR 

146.30 or 33 CFR 146.303. If the casualty is one in which MMS is the lead agency, 

the Coast Guard report may indicate that the cause of this casualty is being 

investigated by the MMS. 

F.8. DEPARTMENT 

OF JUSTICE (DOJ) 

F.8.a. Referral for Criminal Enforcement Action 

F.8.b. “6(e) List” 

F.9. FEDERAL 

BUREAU OF 

INVESTIGATION 

(FBI) 

F.9.a. Coast Guard and FBI Responsibilities 

Investigations indicating evidence of criminal violation shall be referred to the U.S. 

attorney in accordance with 33 CFR 1.07-90. Such referrals shall be made by the 

District Commander (dl) as soon as there is sufficient evidence to support the 

violation. Where 33 CFR l.07-90 requires the Commandant's approval prior to 

referral, the completed Commandant's Action will constitute authority for such 

referral. If, for any reason, referral to the U.S. attorney cannot await Commandant 

review of the casualty report, verbal authority may be requested from Commandant 

(CG-545). A U.S. attorney is not precluded from initiating action without formal 

Coast Guard referral. When evidence of criminal liability is also within the 

cognizance of other agencies such as the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), state, 

or local law enforcement agencies, such evidence may be referred to that agency in a 

timely manner without approval of the Commandant, however District approval is 

still required. 

Upon DOJ accepting the referral and going to a grand jury, an IO may request that 

the U.S. Attorney place them on the “6(e) list.” This is an exception to the General 

Rule of Secrecy regarding grand jury material under the rules of criminal procedure. 

If a person is allowed on the 6(e) list, they must not share grand jury information with 

anyone else who is not on that list. Contact the servicing Legal Office with any 

questions regarding the 6(e) list. 

The Coast Guard entered into an MOU with the FBI on March 23, 1979 for the 

purposes of counteracting terrorist activities in the marine environment. A second 

MOU was signed on August 20, 1980 expanding the cooperative effort between the 

Coast Guard and the FBI to cover all violations of federal law on the high seas, 

navigable waters, and areas adjacent to the navigable waters. The MOU anticipates 

that cooperation between the two agencies will be made at the District level. If an 

activity investigated by the Coast Guard appears to have a potential for FBI 

involvement, the IO should contact the servicing Legal Office. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART A: ADMINISTRATION

CHAPTER 3: OVERARCHING POLICIES

A3-13 

F.9.b. Investigative Lead 

F.10. BUREAU OF 

ALCOHOL TOBACCO 

AND FIREARMS 

(ATF) 

The MOU states that because the Coast Guard and FBI have differing areas of 

expertise, cooperation is often a better solution than having one agency take lead. 

Additionally, the FBI does not have the authority to board vessels without a warrant, 

while the Coast Guard does. The FBI’s mandate authorizes them to investigate all 

federal criminal violations that have not been specifically assigned by Congress to 

another federal agency. 

The Coast Guard entered into an MOU with ATF on April 26, 2002, for the purpose 

of providing investigative expertise with regard to fires and explosions on Coast 

Guard facilities, involve Coast Guard personnel, under investigation by the Coast 

Guard pursuant to 46 USC 6301 for which the Coast Guard requests ATF assistance, 

and under investigation by the ATF pursuant to 18 USC 846 for which the ATF 

request Coast Guard assistance. ATF may provide investigators, lab analysis, fire 

cause or destructive device determination statements, and training. 

F.11. DEPARTMENT 

OF DEFENSE (DOD) 

F.11.a. Coordination – General 

The procedures in this section shall be applied in cases of U.S. public vessels involved 

in a reportable marine casualty (see 46 CFR 4.05-1) with a merchant or recreational 

vessel of the U.S. or a foreign vessel operating in navigable U.S. waters. 

F.11.b. Navy and MSC Vessels 

F.11.c. Contract Operated United States Naval Ship (USNS) Vessels 

When vessels of the U.S. Navy, including Military Sealift Command (MSC) vessels, 

are involved, the Judge Advocate General's Corps officer of the naval district in 

which the casualty occurred shall be advised. When vessels of the U.S. Army Corps 

of Engineers (USACE) or another governmental department are involved, the district 

Army engineer or appropriate command shall be advised. The participation of 

appropriate witnesses shall be requested; if this request is denied, Commandant (CG545) shall be advised immediately. The investigation shall proceed without these 

witnesses, in accordance with the procedures set forth in this chapter. [NOTE: As 

provided by 46 CFR 4.11-1, military personnel and civil service employees serving 

aboard vessels controlled by the Army or Navy may not be subpoenaed to appear as 

witnesses in an investigation without the consent of the governmental agency 

concerned. 

Under a July 29, 2004 MOU with Commander, MSC, the Coast Guard will 

investigate all reported marine casualties (see 46 CFR 4.05-1) involving contractoperated USNS vessels, except in specific cases when the MSC requests that there be 

no investigation. When a casualty investigation is conducted, MSC will assist the 

Coast Guard to the extent practicable in the investigation and in obtaining necessary 

witnesses. Civil service and military manned vessels and their masters/commanding 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART A: ADMINISTRATION

CHAPTER 3: OVERARCHING POLICIES

A3-14 

officers will not report marine casualties to the Coast Guard, and the Coast Guard 

will not investigate such casualties except when specifically requested by the 

Commander MSC. When requested not to investigate, the Officer in Charge, Marine 

Inspection (OCMI) should advise Commandant (CG-545) by message or other 

appropriate means. [NOTE: This policy does not affect the Coast Guard's policy to 

investigate casualties when a USNS vessel is involved in a casualty with another vessel 

over which the Coast Guard has jurisdiction.] 

F.11.d. Disciplinary Action 

The Coast Guard has authority to take disciplinary action under 46 USC Chapter 77

against MMCs held by any civil service or contract crewmember signed on vessels of 

the MSC, when possession of a valid license of seaman's document issued by the 

Coast Guard is a condition of employment.

F.12. THE 

DEPARTMENT OF 

LABOR/OCCUPATIONAL 

SAFETY AND HEALTH 

ADMINISTRATION 

(OSHA) 

F.12.a. Shipyard and Harbor Worker Accidents 

Under 33 USC 941, the Secretary of Labor conducts investigations of accidents and 

deaths involving employees covered by that Act. This investigative authority parallels 

that of the Coast Guard under 46 U.S.C. 6301. [NOTE: See 46 CFR 4.01-3 for the 

reporting exclusion with respect to deaths of shipyard or harbor workers.] Whenever 

a casualty occurs involving shipyard or harbor workers that is not the result of a 

shipboard operation conducted by ship’s personnel, the casualty falls under OSHA 

jurisdiction and OSHA should be notified for investigation. 

F.12.b. Outer Continental Shelf Activity Accidents 

The Coast Guard and OSHA signed an MOU on 19 December 1979 to establish 

procedures to increase consultation and coordination on the Outer Continental Shelf 

(OCS). Specifically, Sections IV-B(2) and (3) of the MOU, entitled “Investigation of 

Accidents” and “Investigation of Allegations” state respectively that in accordance 

with regulations issued under its authority, the Coast Guard will investigate deaths, 

injuries, and other casualties or accidents occurring as a result of operations 

conducted pursuant to the OCS Act. In the course of all such investigations, formal 

and informal, the Coast Guard will cooperate with OSHA with respect to identifying 

violations of applicable OSHA regulations related to the casualty or accident. Where 

a Coast Guard investigation identifies an apparent violation of an applicable OSHA 

regulation, the Coast Guard will notify OSHA and subsequently will cooperate with 

OSHA with respect to any enforcement action OSHA may undertake. The Coast 

Guard will review any allegation from any person of the existence of a violation of an 

occupational safety or health regulation or other unsafe working condition on the 

OCS and take appropriate action under the circumstances. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART A: ADMINISTRATION

CHAPTER 3: OVERARCHING POLICIES

A3-15 

46 CFR 197 F.12.c. Commercial Diving Accidents involving Inspected Vessels and 

Platforms 

F.12.d. Commercial Diving Accidents involving Uninspected Vessels 

G.1. COOPERATION 

AND COORDINATION

G.2. THE IMO

CODE

G.2.a. The IMO Code 

G.2.b. Adoption of the Code 

The IMO adopted resolution A.849(20) which contains the Code, and has revoked 

Resolutions A.173 (ES.IV), A.440(IX), and A.637(16). The United States strongly 

supports Resolution A.849 (20) and the Code. The Coast Guard will implement the 

code to the maximum extent possible under its existing legal and regulatory 

authorities. 

Commercial diving accidents involving inspected vessels and platforms are explicitly 

under the sole investigative jurisdiction of the Coast Guard. While OSHA 

cooperation and involvement may be useful and even desired, such assistance is 

without legal jurisdiction and entirely at the discretion of the IO or Marine Board. 

SCUBA accidents of passengers who were transported aboard inspected passenger 

vessels shall not be considered commercial diving accidents. 

Commercial diving from platforms other than inspected vessels fall under OSHA 

jurisdiction. While the Coast Guard retains overlapping authority to investigate these 

incidents, such duplication of effort is generally unnecessary and not desirable. 

Accordingly, the IO shall coordinate closely with OSHA representatives regarding 

these incidents, and shall undertake an independent investigation only when OSHA 

or similar state agency intent no investigation of their own. 

G. THE IMO CODE FOR THE INVESTIGATION OF MARINE CASUALTIES AND INCIDENTS

Many international conventions such as the International Convention for the Safety 

of Life at Sea, 1974 (SOLAS), the International Convention on Load Lines, 1966 

(ILLC); and the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships, 

1973 (MARPOL) require flag states to investigate marine casualties. The 

international community has increasingly become aware of the benefits of 

cooperating in casualty investigations given the international nature of shipping and 

the fact that flag-state interests often overlap port-state interests. As a result, a series 

of International Maritime Organization (IMO) resolutions have addressed 

international cooperation in increasing depth resulting in valuable cooperative

investigations over the last several years. 

The Code provides a systematic approach to investigations and enhances the existing 

cooperation frameworks. Drawing on the experience of these cooperative 

investigations, and recognizing the opportunity to improve safety through 

information sharing, the IMO member states developed the Code for the 

Investigation of Marine Casualties and Incidents. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART A: ADMINISTRATION

CHAPTER 3: OVERARCHING POLICIES

A3-16 

G.2.c. Mechanism for Cooperation 

G.3. FLAG AND 

PORT STATE 

OBLIGATIONS TO 

INVESTIGATE

G.3.a. Joint Investigation 

G.3.b. Independent Investigations

G.4. SHARING OF 

DRAFT REPORTS OF 

INVESTIGATION 

(ROIS) 

G.5. POINTS OF 

CONTACT FOR THE 

UNITED STATES

The Coast Guard has notified the IMO that the responsible authority within the 

United States to contact regarding cooperation in marine casualty investigations is 

Commandant (CG-545). Commandant (CG-545) can be reached during the workday 

at (202) 372-1029, and after hours through the Headquarters Command Center at 

(800) DAD-SAFE. 

G.6. IO

RESPONSIBILITIES

IOs should use the Code procedures to the maximum extent possible in all marine 

casualty investigations in which the U.S. is an SIS. 

IMO Resolution A.849 (20) provides a mechanism for cooperation between member 

states during investigations along with common-approach investigative procedures. 

Enabling the Lead Investigating State (LIS) as well as Substantially Interested States 

(SISs) to participate in an accident investigation promotes maximum cooperation. 

The common-approach procedures define the purposes of casualty investigations and 

provide a list of information to be gathered, methods for securing physical evidence, 

and procedures for authenticating documents, reviewing voyage data recorders, and 

obtaining information from other sources. These procedures have been incorporated 

into this volume. Also see Navigation and Vessel Inspection Circular (NVIC 5-98). 

Upon notification, member states may fulfill their obligations to conduct an 

investigation by participating fully in the investigation of another SIS. When member 

states elect to participate in an investigation, they will select an LIS. The LIS devises 

the strategy of the investigation, governs the investigative proceedings, ensures the 

laws of the investigating state are observed during the investigation, is custodian of 

interview records and other evidence, prepares the Report of Investigation (ROI) 

including the views of SISs, and provides reasonable logistical support. 

In the event that SISs elect to conduct their own independent investigations after 

receiving notification of a marine casualty, the various investigations should follow 

the Code and its procedures, should share evidence, and should be coordinated to 

avoid conflicting demands on witnesses and access to evidence.

Upon completion of an investigation (whether independent or joint), SISs should 

share drafts of their ROI at the earliest opportunity. Final versions of the ROIs 

should reflect the input received from the other SISs. When SISs cannot agree 

regarding all or part of the ROI, they are free to submit their own reports to the 

IMO. The minimum contents of an ROI can be found in section 14 of Enclosure (1) 

to NVIC 5-98 and have been substantively integrated into Chapter A6 of this 

volume. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART A: ADMINISTRATION

CHAPTER 3: OVERARCHING POLICIES

A3-17 

H. LABOR – MANAGEMENT DISPUTES

H.1. GENERAL

H.2. WORK/REST 

SCHEDULES AND 

FATIGUE

H.3. CONTROL OF 

THE INVESTIGATION

I.1. General 

I.2. 

Information to 

be Included in 

Merchant 

Mariner’s 

Record 

At a minimum, as a part of the Suspension and Revocation (S&R) process the 

following information should be entered into the MMLD data system regarding a 

merchant mariner’s record: 

A Complaint has been issued against a mariner’s MMC; 

A Letter of Warning (LOW) issued and accepted by a mariner;

IOs shall not become involved in labor/management conflicts. If a contractual 

infraction did not affect the safety of the passengers, crew, vessel, marine 

environment, or national security, then action against MMCs or other remedial action 

should not normally be taken. This policy requires OCMIs and their department 

heads to remember that Coast Guard Officers should not place themselves in roles as 

labor/management arbitrators. See 46 CFR 5.71; Appeal Decision 2470 (Giachetti). 

Labor and management practices can create latent unsafe conditions that ultimately 

result in an accident, incident, or violation. Accordingly, issues between labor and 

management are frequently legitimate areas to explore during marine investigation. 

IOs must investigate work/rest schedules and the possibility of fatigue. 

Although such investigations are undertaken by other agencies, the Coast Guard does 

not conduct investigations to document disabilities, labor conditions, etc., for use in 

disability litigation or workman’s compensation claim settlement. When such issues 

are present, parties to the investigation may attempt to use the investigation as a 

vehicle to “discover” information and documents useful for these purposes. The IO 

shall retain control of the investigation and assure that only evidence and testimony 

relevant to the purposes of the investigation are explored and examined. 

I. MERCHANT MARINER’S RECORD/WANTED LIST

In the past, IOs have taken administrative action against an MMC that was 

documented in the Marine Safety Information System (MSIS) and often never looked 

at again. As a result, oftentimes, mariners would have their MMC suspended or 

revoked in one OCMI zone, only to have it reissued in another OCMI zone. 

Additionally, very few administrative actions (i.e. letters of warning, suspensions, 

revocations, etc.) against a mariner’s MMC were ever documented in the Merchant 

Mariner License & Document (MMLD) data system. In other situations, IOs have 

receive notification of non-credentialed mariners who failed pre-employment, 

random, or other mandated drug tests, but because the mariners did not hold an 

MMC against which administrative action could be taken, there was limited 

documentation and no information entered in MMLD or shared between OCMI 

zones. As a result, a non-credentialed mariner who had failed a drug test could later 

apply and receive a MMC from an OCMI without the OCMI knowing about the 

failed drug test. With the new Marine Information for Safety and Law Enforcement 

(MISLE) data system the Coast Guard has corrected this situation. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART A: ADMINISTRATION

CHAPTER 3: OVERARCHING POLICIES

A3-18 

A Voluntary Surrender made by a mariner (equivalent to Revocation); 

A Voluntary Deposit made by a mariner; or 

An S&R outcome where a sanction is imposed. 

Notification to the National Maritime Center (NMC) should be made via the notify 

NMC function within the MISLE enforcement activity opened to document the 

enforcement action taken against the mariner’s Merchant Mariner’s Credential 

(MMC). For additional information see Chapter C4 of this volume. 

Additionally, a new record in the MMLD data system should be created for a noncredentialed mariner who has failed a pre-employment, random, or other mandated 

drug test documenting the failed drug test since it can be reasonably inferred that the 

mariner may apply for an MMC in the future. 

I.3. Reasons 

for Locking or 

Unlocking a 

Merchant 

Mariner’s 

Record 

A merchant mariner’s record should be locked in MMLD data system for the 

following reasons: 

Whenever an S&R outcome is Revocation; 

Whenever an S&R outcome is Revocation Stayed (drug settlement); 

Whenever an S&R outcome is Outright Suspension; 

Whenever there is a “Good Faith” Deposit; 

Whenever there is a Voluntary Deposit; 

Whenever there is Voluntary Surrender; 

Whenever a non-credentialed mariner has failed a mandated drug test; and 

Whenever a merchant mariner is placed on the Wanted List. 

I.4. Placing 

Merchant 

Mariners on 

the Wanted 

List 

Formerly, there were two lists that a merchant mariner could be placed upon in 

MSIS. These were the Seaman Wanted List and the Seaman Locator List. The 

reason for the two separate lists was to distinguish the difference between needing to 

find the mariner during the investigation versus the enforcement process. In MISLE, 

this list is known simply as the Wanted List. Currently, the reasons for placing a 

person on the Wanted List are listed below: 

Wanted for purposes of an investigation; 

Wanted to deliver civil penalty correspondence; 

Wanted for pending enforcement action; 

Notification to the NMC of a failed drug test by a non-credentialed mariner shall be 

made via the notify NMC function within the MISLE Notification created to 

document the receipt of the results of the failed drug test. 

Merchant mariner’s records shall not be locked by IOs for any other reason without 

the permission of Commandant (CG-545). When the reason for locking a merchant 

mariner’s record is resolved, the record should be unlocked (i.e. administrative 

clemency is granted, mariner has served the suspension, mariner completed 

settlement conditions, etc.). For additional information see Chapter C4 of this 

volume. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART A: ADMINISTRATION

CHAPTER 3: OVERARCHING POLICIES

A3-19 

Wanted to deliver ALJs decision and order; and, 

Wanted to acquire an invalid or revoked MMC. 

I.5. Sending 

Information 

to, Locking, 

and Unlocking 

a Merchant 

Mariner’s 

Record 

The process to send information to, lock, and unlock a merchant mariner’s record is 

quite simple and should be executed immediately. When the criteria set forth in 

Sections I.2., I.3., and/or I.4. are met the IO should use the notify NMC function of 

the MISLE enforcement activity opened to document the enforcement action taken 

against the mariner. This is the preferred method of notification. Alternatively, the 

IO may send an e-mail to the NMC at the following e-mail address: 

D05-DG-NMCMMLDLock, located in the Global listing. 

If not notifying NMC via MISLE, the following information is required to be in the 

e-mail in this format: 

PERSONNEL ACTION: (LAST NAME, FIRST NAME MIDDLE NAME, SSN) 

(Subject of e-mail: choose one of the following) MMLD INFO NOTIFICATION /

MMLD LOCK / MMLD UNLOCK 

IDENTIFICATION: 1) Merchant Mariner’s License or Document Number 

 2) Merchant Mariner’s MMLD Reference Number

(Reference number is found when you access the Party File via MMLD in MISLE) 

ACTIVITY NUMBER: MISLE Enforcement Activity # (may be the Incident 

Investigation Activity # for locking a record due to putting them on the Wanted List) 

J.1. General At times IOs get into situations where they are unknowingly dealing with dangerous 

persons or are unable to locate persons with regards to an investigation or 

enforcement activity. Commandant (CG-545) has acquired access to various 

computer applications and other information resources that will remedy some of 

these problems. 

Mariners shall not be placed on the Wanted List for any other reason without the 

permission of Commandant (CG-545). The list is expected to grow and change with 

the MISLE system. Any time a mariner is placed on the Wanted List their MMLD 

file should be locked. Units placing mariners on the wanted list should continue 

efforts to locate mariners. For additional information on removing mariners from 

the wanted list and Enforcement Activity status see Chapter C4 of this volume. 

REASON FOR NOTIFICATION AND/OR OUTCOME OF 

ENFORCEMENT: Should be one of the reasons for sending info to, locking, and 

unlocking a merchant mariner’s record listed in Sections I.2., I.3., and I.4. 

J. INFORMATION/OTHER RESOURCES
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART A: ADMINISTRATION

CHAPTER 3: OVERARCHING POLICIES

A3-20 

J.2. 

NCIC/NLETS 

General 

IOs were given access to National Crime Information Center (NCIC) and National 

Law Enforcement Telecommunications System (NLETS) information. IOs are law 

enforcement officers and as such are authorized to conduct law enforcement 

activities. NCIC/NLETS will better enable IOs to know with whom they are dealing 

in order to be better prepared to take appropriate law enforcement action. The FBI 

oversees the use of NCIC/NLETS and has granted the Coast Guard access. The 

Coast Guard connection to the FBI’s NCIC/NLETS system is for official law 

enforcement support activities only. 

J.3. 

NCIC/NLETS

POLICY

Only personnel meeting the prerequisites below may request access to 

NCIC/NLETS. Access is not authorized to investigators that solely conduct 

pollution incident investigations (PIs). IOs with NCIC/NLETS access shall not

share account access with any other personnel. NCIC/NLETS shall not be accessed 

unless there is an associated incident investigation or enforcement activity within the 

MISLE data system. NCIC/NLETS information shall not be released to the public. 

NCIC/NLETS information shall not be released to parties in interest when

conducting marine casualty investigations. 

J.4. 

PREREQUISITES FOR 

REQUESTING ACCESS 

TO NCIC/NLETS 

The following perquisites must be met prior to requesting access to NCIC/NLETS: 

The IO must have a secret security clearance or higher; 

The IO must be designated in writing as an Investigating Officer; 

The IO must have completed the Basic Investigating Officer Course (IOC) at 

TRACEN Yorktown; and 

The IO must be fully qualified to conduct marine casualty investigations or 

suspension and revocation investigations. 

J.5. ACCEPTABLE 

USE OF 

NCIC/NLETS 

IOs may access NCIC/NLETS when conducting any incident investigation other 

than a pollution incident investigation and prior to personally delivering official Coast 

Guard enforcement correspondence or subpoenas. IOs may access NCIC/NLETS 

when an investigation uncovers criminal activity. 

The Coast Guard Investigative Service is responsible as the network administrator of 

NCIC/NLETS use within the Coast Guard, which includes monitoring of use, 

quality assurance reviews, audits, and investigations of alleged, actual or suspected 

unauthorized or improper use of NCIC/NLETS. 

Any IO who transfers to another unit or internally within their unit and is no longer 

filling the position of an IO shall request their access to be denied. Any IO who does 

not meet the prerequisites and has already been given access to NCIC/NLETS shall 

request their access be removed. EXCEPTIONS: At units where there are no 

personnel meeting the prerequisites, the Commanding Officer is authorized access. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART A: ADMINISTRATION

CHAPTER 3: OVERARCHING POLICIES

A3-21 

J.6. 

UNACCEPTABLE USE 

OF NCIC/NLETS 

IOs shall not access NCIC/NLETS for the following: 

“Stand-alone” pollution incident investigations; 

Administrative Clemency; 

Any National Maritime Center (NMC) purpose (this does not include the IO

conducting a preliminary investigation of an applicant based upon a request from the 

NMC); or 

J.7. 

RAMIFICATIONS FOR 

AND EXAMPLES OF 

UNAUTHORIZED OR 

IMPROPER USE OF 

NCIC/NLETS 

Any IO who improperly accesses NCIC/NLETS shall lose access to the system and 

may be subject to criminal and administrative penalties of not more than $10,000. 

Additionally, improper use jeopardizes NCIC/NLETS access for the entire Coast 

Guard. 

The most frequent examples of improper use of NCIC/NLETS is conducting 

criminal background checks of family members, friends, neighbors, or yourself “just 

to see what happens,” “as a favor,” or “for training” (there are specific ALLOWED 

test queries that may be run in NCIC on the MISLE user guide website – do not use 

any other names to ‘train’ for using NCIC). 

Any scheduled boardings/inspections. 

All incidents of alleged, actual or suspected unauthorized or improper use of 

NCIC/NLETS shall be reported to and investigated by the Coast Guard 

Investigative Service. 

J.8. ACCESSING 

AND TERMINATING 

ACCESS 

NCIC/NLETS 

IOs meeting the prerequisites above may request access to NCIC/NLETS by using 

the form at http://cgweb.osc.uscg.mil/csdcontent/warning.htm [fill in required info 

and select NCIC/NLETS system]. Additionally, any IO who transfers out of an IO 

position shall use the same website to request to have their access removed. Upon 

becoming an authorized user of NCIC/NLETS, the system can be accessed at 

http://cglelinxx.osc.uscg.mil/cyblinxx/loginbody.htm or from the Parties menu with 

MISLE. 

J.9. LOCATING 

PEOPLE

J.10. 

COMMANDANT (CG545)

INVESTIGATIONS 

“ GO TEAM” 

Currently, Commandant (CG-545) has access to software that can assist in locating 

personnel. Upon request, for the purposes mentioned in I.4 above (and possibly 

other purposes determined on a case-by-case basis), Commandant (CG-545) can 

attempt to locate a person. 

Within Commandant (CG-545), there is an investigative team that may be available to 

assist units/districts/areas with major investigations, large scale or complicated 

investigations, investigations in the international arena, or whenever requested. The 

team consists of policy experts and professional mariners both Deck and Engineering 

Officers in the Merchant Marine. Requests for the Commandant (CG-545) 

Investigations “Go Team” must have approval from all levels of the chain of 

command. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART A: ADMINISTRATION

CHAPTER 3: OVERARCHING POLICIES

A3-22 

J.11. 

INTELLIGENCE 

COORDINATION 

CENTER (ICC) 

The major mission functions that the ICC supports are maritime drug interdictions, 

marine environmental issues, port safety, fisheries, military readiness, and illegal 

maritime alien migration to the United States. The ICC supports these functions by 

serving as the hub of intelligence communications between the Coast Guard and the 

rest of the National Intelligence Community and Law Enforcement Community. 

The ICC can be reached at: 1-800-842-0821 Ext.3334. 
USCG Marine Safety Manual 

Volume V: Investigations and Enforcement

PART A: ADMINISTRATION 

Chapter Four: 

Training and Certification of 

Marine Investigators
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART A: ADMINISTRATION

CHAPTER 4: TRAINING AND QUALIFICATION 

A4-i 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

A. TRAINING AND CERTIFICATION.................... 1

A.1. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................................................1

A.2. TRAINING MANAGEMENT ................................................................................................................................................1

A.3. MISSION ESSENTIAL TRAINING REQUIREMENTS ..............................................................................................................1

A.3.a. General.....................................................................................................................................................................1

A.3.b. Waivers.....................................................................................................................................................................1

A.4. PERFORMANCE QUALIFICATION SYSTEM (PQS) ..............................................................................................................1

A.5. CERTIFICATION AS AN APPRENTICE MARINE INVESTIGATOR ..........................................................................................1

A.6. CERTIFICATION AS A JOURNEYMAN MARINE INVESTIGATOR...........................................................................................2

A.7. CERTIFICATION AS AN EXPERT SENIOR INVESTIGATING OFFICER (SIO)..........................................................................2

B. ASSIGNMENT AND DESIGNATION.................... 2

B.1. ASSIGNMENT TO AN OPERATIONAL BILLET AS A MARINE INVESTIGATOR .......................................................................2

B.1.a. General.....................................................................................................................................................................2

B.1.b. Entry-level Personnel ...............................................................................................................................................2

B.1.c. Internal Rotation and “Short” Tours .......................................................................................................................2

B.2. DESIGNATION...................................................................................................................................................................2

B.3. ASSIGNMENT OF CERFITIED MARINE INVESTIGATORS .....................................................................................................3

B.4. ASSIGNMENT OF RESERVE MARINE INVESTIGATORS ........................................................................................................3

B.5. ASSIGNMENT OF CIVILIAN MARINE INVESTIGATORS .......................................................................................................3

C. MARINE INVESTIGATOR BADGES AND CREDENTIALS ...... 3

C.1. GENERAL..........................................................................................................................................................................3

C.2. ISSUANCE..........................................................................................................................................................................3

C.3. USE ..................................................................................................................................................................................4

C.4. CONTROL.........................................................................................................................................................................4

C.5. SECURITY AND ACCOUNTABILITY....................................................................................................................................4

C.6. RETIREMENT BADGES .......................................................................................................................................................5

D. CARRIAGE OF FIREARMS ........................ 5

D.1. GENERAL .........................................................................................................................................................................5

D.2. USE OF FORCE .................................................................................................................................................................5
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART A: ADMINISTRATION

CHAPTER 4: TRAINING AND QUALIFICATION 

A4-1 

A.1.

INTRODUCTION

A.2. TRAINING 

MANAGEMENT

CG-545 and the Office of Resource Planning, CG-741, share responsibility for 

overall management of the Marine Investigator training program, to include: 

-Development of annual training fund requirements; 

-Management of marine investigation training funds; 

-Obtaining training quotas from authorized training sources; 

-Direct liaison with TRACEN Yorktown and other training sources; 

-Management of training quotas obtained for Marine Investigators; 

-Development of alternative training methods and procedures; and 

A.3. MISSION 

ESSENTIAL TRAINING 

REQUIREMENTS

A.3.a. General 

A.3.b. Waivers 

A.4. PERFORMANCE 

QUALIFICATION 

SYSTEM (PQS) 

A.5.

CERTIFICATION AS 

AN APPRENTICE 

MARINE 

INVESTIGATOR

To be considered a certified as an Apprentice Marine Investigator you must be 

assigned to an operational billet as a Marine Investigator, be designated in writing as 

an IO, have attended the basic Investigating Officer Course (IOC) at TRACEN 

Yorktown and complete the Casualty Investigator (FO) qualification. 

A. TRAINING AND CERTIFICATION

It cannot be stressed enough that proper training is the most important aspect to 

ensuring our personnel are prepared and motivated to do the job. In efforts to build 

the Marine Investigation Program core competencies, prerequisites for becoming a 

Marine Investigator and completing each step in training and certification must be 

upheld. This chapter will detail the requirements for both. 

-Management of training assignments in cooperation with the Coast Guard Training 

 Quota Management Center (TQC). 

CG-545 is responsible for determining mission essential training requirements for all 

Marine Investigators in order to meet Coast Guard and program operational 

commitments. Annual training fund requests and allocation of available training 

funds and quotas will be determined by the cognizant command authority based on 

mission essential requirements and the needs of the service. 

Only CG-545 may grant a waiver to any certification or minimum standard for 

training. Coast Guard commands shall ensure that all IOs assigned for training meet 

the prerequisites for attending initial training. Personnel not meeting these standards 

must submit a written request to CG-545 via the chain of command to waive any 

minimum standard or certification as part of the initial training quota request.

In order to become certified with a specialty (e.g. casualty investigator, suspension 

and revocation investigator, etc.), the IO must complete PQS and sit before a 

qualification board of other personnel that are certified in that specialty. Any 

recommended changes to the PQS should be submitted to CG-545 for consideration.
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART A: ADMINISTRATION

CHAPTER 4: TRAINING AND QUALIFICATION 

A4-2 

A.6.

CERTIFICATION AS A 

JOURNEYMAN MARINE 

INVESTIGATOR

A.7.

CERTIFICATION AS 

AN EXPERT SENIOR 

INVESTIGATING 

OFFICER (SIO) 

Personnel assignments are generally beyond the control of local commands. 

Incoming Expert Investigating Officers, or Senior Investigating Officers (SIOs) shall 

be designated in writing as an IO and should at a minimum have previously served 

four years as an Investigator and have been certified as a Journeyman Investigator. 

B.1. ASSIGNMENT 

TO AN OPERATIONAL 

BILLET AS A MARINE 

INVESTIGATOR

B.1.a. General 

B.1.b. Entry-level Personnel 

B.1.c. Internal Rotation and “ Short ” Tours 

B.2. DESIGNATION

To be considered a certified Journeyman Investigator you must have completed a 

minimum of 2 years as an Apprentice Marine Investigator, have attended both IOC 

and AIOC at TRACEN Yorktown and completed all of the following qualifications: 

Casualty Investigator (FO), Violation Investigator (EO) and Suspension and 

Revocation Investigator (FN). 

B. ASSIGNMENT AND DESIGNATION

Personnel assigned to an operational billet as a Marine Investigator should already be 

familiar with marine safety laws and regulations through training and qualifications, 

generally, as a marine inspector prior to being assigned to marine investigation duties. 

Upon assignment, IOs shall acquire a SECRET (or higher) security clearance. 

As a matter of policy, entry level (i.e. first tour in Marine Safety) personnel shall not 

be assigned to marine investigator billets. Such personnel are not adequately familiar 

enough with marine safety laws and regulations to execute marine investigations that 

often drive changes in policy/regulation/law and are fully available to the public. 

The Marine Investigations Program is considered the “graduate school” of the 

marine safety community. Accordingly, internal rotation through a marine 

investigation billet is inappropriate; personnel assigned are expected to have had 

preliminary tours rendering such “ticket” punching unnecessary. As with “short” 

tours, active duty military Marine Investigators may occasionally be selected for 

reassignment within a unit or to a new unit prior to completion of their original tour 

assignment. Such reassignments are based on the needs of the command and are 

often required to fill critical positions within the Coast Guard. Because of the 

enormous investment of training and experience required to certify as a Marine 

Investigator and to gain technical competence, internal rotations and “short” tours 

are highly discouraged. 

Upon assignment to an operational billet as a marine investigator, personnel shall 

receive a formal letter of designation from the command authorizing them to 

investigate within the command’s area of responsibility. The designation letter 

outlines their specific duties and responsibilities, to include any signature authority. 

The letter of designation does not mean the individual is ‘certified’ to conduct marine 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART A: ADMINISTRATION

CHAPTER 4: TRAINING AND QUALIFICATION 

A4-3 

B.3. ASSIGNMENT 

OF CERFITIED 

MARINE 

INVESTIGATORS

B.4. ASSIGNMENT 

OF RESERVE MARINE 

INVESTIGATORS

B.5. ASSIGNMENT 

OF CIVILIAN MARINE 

INVESTIGATORS

C.1. GENERAL

C.2. ISSUANCE In addition to the minimum criteria outlined in COMDINST 5512.2 the following 

requirements must be followed: 

-In order to qualify for a badge the IO must be assigned to an investigating officer 

billet and must routinely conduct marine casualty investigations or investigations of 

credentialed merchant mariners; 

-A badge may not be issues without marine investigator credentials, and vice versa; 

-Marine investigator credentials shall only be generated using the most current 

system; 

-A marine investigator badge and credential issued to a marine investigator shall have 

matching numbers; 

-Only CG-545 authorized credentials may be displayed by a marine investigator; 

-CG-545 authorized marine investigator credentials may not be altered in any way. 

investigations and is a Marine Investigator. Such individuals are referred to as IOs 

Personnel previously assigned, designated, trained, and certified as Marine 

Investigators are encouraged and may subsequently be assigned to a second marine 

investigation tour, oftentimes as an SIO. In such instances, no training or additional 

qualification is required other than area familiarization provided the individual has 

been redesignated as an IO in writing at the new unit. 

Reserve Marine Investigators are recruited to fill specific billets within a unit, and are 

therefore not normally internally rotated or reassigned. It is not, however, 

uncommon for a reserve Marine Investigator to relocate to a new area, either for 

personal reasons or as a transfer with their civilian employer. In those instances, 

reserve Marine Investigators must adhere to policy and guidance governing such 

moves contained in the Reserve Policy Manual, COMDTINST M1001.28 (series). 

Commanding Officers shall coordinate transfer of reserve Marine Investigators to the 

extent consistent with the Reserve Policy Manual. Receiving commands may employ 

certified reserve Marine Investigators as discussed in paragraph B.3. above. Reserve 

personnel desiring to become Marine Investigators must be designated in writing as 

an IO and undergo all training, PQS, and certification as active duty marine 

investigators. 

Civilian Marine Investigators are hired to fill specific positions within the Coast 

Guard. Such civilian Marine Investigators are bound by the training, PQS, and 

certification discussed in this chapter, but are advised that they lack the general law 

enforcement authorities granted to Coast Guard military personnel above the rank of 

E-3 by statute. 

C. MARINE INVESTIGATOR BADGES AND CREDENTIALS

Policies and procedures regarding the issuance of Marine Investigator Credentials and 

Badges are contained in COMDTINST 5512.2. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART A: ADMINISTRATION

CHAPTER 4: TRAINING AND QUALIFICATION 

A4-4 

C.3. USE

C.3.b. Recommendations for using the marine investigator badge and credentials: 

-When Liaison with other law enforcement agencies is necessary; 

-When multiple agencies are responding to an incident; 

-When access to a scene/facility is necessary; 

-Prior to questioning witnesses; or 

C.4. CONTROL Sector Commanders that have more marine investigators meeting the minimum 

requirements than they have badges may request a specific number of additional 

badges from CG-545. The requesting authority must be the Sector Commander. 

Procurement or duplication of marine investigator badges and credentials is strictly 

prohibited. 

C.5. SECURITY 

AND ACCOUNTABILITY

C.3.a. CG-545 will provide a leather carrying case for every marine investigator 

badge and credential. Marine investigator credentials shall always be carried in the 

provided carry case, unless the badge is being visibly displayed on the investigators 

person. Visibly displaying the badge is only authorized while conducting 

investigations in civilian attire. Generally speaking it is not advisable to display the 

badge on the marine investigator’s person when the Coast Guard is the sole agency 

responding to a specific incident. 

-When a visible Coast Guard Marine Investigator presence is required (visibly on the 

marine investigator’s person). 

Long term (more than a year) unassigned badges should be returned to CG-545 via 

registered or express mail in order to remove them from the unit’s inventory of 

badges. CG-545 shall be notified of all status changes with regard to marine 

investigator badges and credentials. The returning of marine investigator badges shall 

be included on unit PCS departure check sheets. 

A quarterly inventory of all badges shall be conducted and maintained at the unit. 

Damaged or severely worn marine investigator badges, credentials and carrying cases 

shall be sent to CG-545 vis registered or express mail for refurbishment or 

destruction. In addition to the requirements in COMDINST 5512.2, CG-545 shall 

be immediately notified or any lost or stolen marine investigator badges or 

credentials. This notification shall be made within 24-hours and may be 

accomplished via telephone at 202-372-1029. An investigation shall be initiated in 

accordance with COMDINST M5830.1, Administrative Investigation Manual, within 

24-hours of the incident involving the lost or stolen marine investigator badges or 

credentials. CG-545 will ensure all information regarding missing badges and 

credentials is entered into the National Crime Information Center (NCIC) database. 

Persons in possession of a lost of stolen marine investigator badge or credential will 

be detained by law enforcement personnel and prosecuted under 18 USC 701, 18 

USC 716, and/or 18 USC 1028. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART A: ADMINISTRATION

CHAPTER 4: TRAINING AND QUALIFICATION 

A4-5 

C.6. RETIREMENT 

BADGES

D.1. GENERAL

D.2. USE OF 

FORCE

Orders for retirement badge plaques or badges suitable for mounting in a shadow 

box for persons who retire with 4 or more years as a marine investigator will be 

coordinated by CG-545 upon request. Plaques or mounting badges will not include 

credentials or carrying cases and will be designated as appropriate retirement 

mementos. 

D. CARRIAGE OF FIREARMS

The carriage of firearms for IOs is at the discretion of the Commanding Officer and 

shall be in accordance with the uniform and equipment requirements and maritime 

law enforcement training requirements (for a boarding team member) found in the 

U.S. Coast Guard Maritime Law Enforcement Manual, COMDTINST M16247.1 

(series). When conducting official marine investigation operations in which firearms 

will be carried, all IOs will wear the same uniform and will always travel in a 

minimum of two person teams. More personnel may be required to ensure proper 

force protection. See the U. S. Coast Guard Maritime Law Enforcement Manual 

(MLEM) for details. 

All IOs shall follow the Use of Force policy detailed in the U. S. Coast Guard 

Maritime Law Enforcement Manual, COMDTINST M16247.1 (series). 
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
USCG Marine Safety Manual 

Volume V: Investigations and Enforcement

PART A: ADMINISTRATION 

Chapter Five: 

Levels of Effort and 

Types of Investigation
 

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART A: ADMINISTRATION

CHAPTER 5: LEVELS OF EFFORT AND TYPES OF INVESTIGATION 

A5-i 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

A. DISCRETION................................. 1

A.1. DISCRETION IN DETERMINING THE APPROPRIATE INVESTIGATIVE LEVEL OF EFFORT......................................................1

B. DEFINITIONS ................................ 1

B.1. CASUALTIES 46 U.S.C. 6101.............................................................................................................................................1

B.1.a Major Marine Casualty .............................................................................................................................................1

B.1.b Public/Non-public Vessel Casualty ...........................................................................................................................1

B.1.c Significant Marine Casualty ......................................................................................................................................1

B.1.d Routine Incident ........................................................................................................................................................2

B.1.e Loss of Life.................................................................................................................................................................2

B.1.f Loss of a Vessel ..........................................................................................................................................................2

B.1.g Initially Estimated Property Damage........................................................................................................................2

C. GENERAL INFORMATION REGARDING LEVELS OF 

INVESTIGATIVE EFFORT ............................ 2

C.1. INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................................................................................2

C.2. PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATIONS .......................................................................................................................................2

C.3. DATA COLLECTION ACTIVITIES .......................................................................................................................................3

C.4. INFORMAL INVESTIGATIONS.............................................................................................................................................3

C.5. FORMAL INVESTIGATIONS................................................................................................................................................3

D. PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATIONS.................... 3

D.1. ACTION ON VERIFIED INCIDENTS .....................................................................................................................................3

D.1.a. General ....................................................................................................................................................................3

D.1.b. External Investigative Resources.............................................................................................................................3

D.1.c. Identifying Major Marine Casualties, Significant Marine Casualties and Public/Non-public Vessel Casualties ...4

D.2. REQUIRED NOTIFICATIONS...............................................................................................................................................4

D.2.a. General ....................................................................................................................................................................4

D.2.b. When CG-545 Shall Be Notified ..............................................................................................................................4

D.2.c. When and How the National Response Center shall be Notified .............................................................................4

D.2.d. How to notify CG-545..............................................................................................................................................5

D.2.e. Contents of the Notification......................................................................................................................................5

E. DATA COLLECTION ACTIVITIES ................... 5

E.1. PURPOSE...........................................................................................................................................................................6

E.2. PARTIES IN INTEREST........................................................................................................................................................6

F. INFORMAL INVESTIGATIONS ...................... 6

F.1. PURPOSE...........................................................................................................................................................................6

F.2. WHEN TO CONDUCT AN INFORMAL INVESTIGATION .........................................................................................................6

F.3. PARTIES IN INTEREST........................................................................................................................................................7

F.4. OPEN PROCEEDINGS .........................................................................................................................................................7

F.5. OPENING THE INFORMAL PROCEEDINGS ...........................................................................................................................7

G. FORMAL INVESTIGATIONS........................ 8
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART A: ADMINISTRATION

CHAPTER 5: LEVELS OF EFFORT AND TYPES OF INVESTIGATION 

A5-ii 

G.1. TYPES OF FORMAL PROCEEDINGS ....................................................................................................................................8

G.2. WHEN TO CONDUCT A FORMAL INVESTIGATION...............................................................................................................8

G.3. MARINE BOARD OF INVESTIGATION.................................................................................................................................9

G.3.a. Introduction..............................................................................................................................................................9

G.3.b. Designation..............................................................................................................................................................9

G.3.c. Precept .....................................................................................................................................................................9

G.3.d. Duties of the Chair...................................................................................................................................................9

G.3.e. Duties of the Members............................................................................................................................................10

G.3.f. Duties of the Recorder............................................................................................................................................10

G.4. DISTRICT FORMAL INVESTIGATION................................................................................................................................11

G.4.a. Introduction............................................................................................................................................................11

G.4.b. Designation............................................................................................................................................................11

G.4.c. Precept ...................................................................................................................................................................12

G.5. UNIT FORMAL INVESTIGATION.......................................................................................................................................12

G.5.a. Introduction............................................................................................................................................................12

G.5.b. Designation............................................................................................................................................................12

G.5.c. Precept ...................................................................................................................................................................12

H. CONDUCT OF FORMAL PROCEEDINGS ................ 12

H.1. PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION .......................................................................................................................................12

H.1.a. Conduct and Scope of the Preliminary Investigation.............................................................................................12

H.1.b. Transition from Informal Investigation..................................................................................................................13

H.1.b. Selection of Witnesses for Formal Proceedings.....................................................................................................13

H.1.c. Selection of Evidence for the Formal Proceedings................................................................................................13

H.1.d. Support of Formal Proceedings.............................................................................................................................13

H.1.e. Operational Control of Investigating Officers........................................................................................................14

H.2. PARTIES IN INTEREST .....................................................................................................................................................14

H.2.a. Introduction............................................................................................................................................................14

H.2.b. Definition ...............................................................................................................................................................14

H.2.c. Designation ............................................................................................................................................................14

H.2.d. Status before Designation ......................................................................................................................................15

H.2.e. Representation by Counsel.....................................................................................................................................15

H.2.f. Special rights under 46 CFR part 4 ........................................................................................................................15

H.2.g. Role in the Proceeding...........................................................................................................................................15

H.2.h. Process for Parties to Exercise their Rights ..........................................................................................................16

H.3. OPEN PROCEEDINGS.......................................................................................................................................................16

H.4. PRESS AND PUBLIC RELATIONS......................................................................................................................................16

H.4.a. Introduction............................................................................................................................................................16

H.4.b. Pre-convening News Release .................................................................................................................................16

H.4.c. Expanded Media Coverage ....................................................................................................................................17

H.4.d. Requests for Expanded Media Coverage. ..............................................................................................................17

H.4.e. Ruling on Request for Expanded Media Coverage ................................................................................................17

H.4.f. Limitations on Expanded Media Coverage.............................................................................................................18

H.4.g. Conduct of Members of the Press ..........................................................................................................................18

H.4.h. Expanded Media Coverage Equipment Limitations...............................................................................................18

H.4.i. Pooling Arrangements............................................................................................................................................19

H.5. APPEAL OF RULINGS BY THE CHAIR OR LEAD INVESTIGATING OFFICER .......................................................................19

H.6. DAILY SUMMARY...........................................................................................................................................................19

I. OPENING THE PROCEEDINGS ..................... 20

I.1. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................................................20

I.2. OPENING THE FORMAL PROCEEDINGS .............................................................................................................................20
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART A: ADMINISTRATION

CHAPTER 5: LEVELS OF EFFORT AND TYPES OF INVESTIGATION 

A5-iii 

I.2.a. Preliminary Meeting................................................................................................................................................20

I.2.b. Opening Statement...................................................................................................................................................20

I.3. MARINE BOARD AND INVESTIGATING OFFICER OATHS / AFFIRMATION ..........................................................................23

I.4. RECEIVING TESTIMONY ...................................................................................................................................................23

I.4.a. Exclusion of Witnesses.............................................................................................................................................23

I.4.b. Appearances............................................................................................................................................................23

I.4.c. Oaths for Interpreters..............................................................................................................................................23

I.4.d. Oaths for Witnesses.................................................................................................................................................23

I.4.e. Use of Subpoenas.....................................................................................................................................................24

I.4.f. Refusal of Witnesses to Testify..................................................................................................................................24

I.4.g. Preliminary Questions.............................................................................................................................................24

I.4.h. Order of Questioning...............................................................................................................................................25

I.4.i. Concluding the Testimony ........................................................................................................................................25

I.4.j. Recall of Witnesses...................................................................................................................................................25

I.5. RECEIVING EVIDENCE .....................................................................................................................................................25

I.5.a. General....................................................................................................................................................................25

I.5.b. Examination by the Marine Board or Lead Investigating Officer...........................................................................26

I.5.c. Authentication..........................................................................................................................................................26

I.5.d. Marking of Third Party Exhibits..............................................................................................................................26

I.6. RELATIONSHIP TO LAW ENFORCEMENT ACTIVITIES........................................................................................................27

I.6.a. General....................................................................................................................................................................27

I.6.b. Criminal Acts...........................................................................................................................................................27

I.6.c. Civil/Administrative Penalties and Suspension and Revocation (S&R) Proceedings..............................................27

I.6.d. Disposition of Evidence for Use in Law Enforcement.............................................................................................28

I.7. COMMENDATIONS ...........................................................................................................................................................28

I.8. ADJOURNING THE PROCEEDINGS .....................................................................................................................................28

I.9. RECONVENING PROCEEDINGS..........................................................................................................................................28

J. DOCUMENTING THE PROCEEDINGS .................. 29

J.1. RECORDING OF SPEECH ...................................................................................................................................................29

J.2. REPORTER'S CERTIFICATE ...............................................................................................................................................29

J.3. TRANSCRIPTION OF RECORDINGS ....................................................................................................................................29

J.4. FORM OF THE TRANSCRIPTS ............................................................................................................................................29

J.5. CONTENTS OF THE TRANSCRIPT......................................................................................................................................29

J.6. APPEARANCE PAGE .........................................................................................................................................................29

J.7. COVER SHEETS AND BINDINGS .......................................................................................................................................30

J.8. CORRECTIONS TO RECORDS, DEPOSITIONS, AND SWORN STATEMENTS .........................................................................30

J.9. DEPOSITIONS AND INTERROGATORIES ............................................................................................................................30

J.10. SWORN STATEMENTS ....................................................................................................................................................31

J.11. PARENTHETICAL ENTRIES .............................................................................................................................................31

J.12. BREAKS IN TESTIMONY .................................................................................................................................................32

J.13. USE OF INTERPRETERS...................................................................................................................................................32

K. CLOSING THE PROCEEDINGS ..................... 33

K.1. INTRODUCTION ..............................................................................................................................................................33

K.2. CLOSING STATEMENT ....................................................................................................................................................33

K.3. DRAFTING THE REPORT..................................................................................................................................................33

K.4. USE OF MISLE...............................................................................................................................................................33

K.5. APPROVAL OF THE REPORT ............................................................................................................................................33

K.6. FINAL DISPOSITION OF RECORDS AND EXHIBITS............................................................................................................33

K.6.a. Final Disposition of Exhibits..................................................................................................................................33

K.6.b. Transmittal Of Exhibits..........................................................................................................................................34
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART A: ADMINISTRATION

CHAPTER 5: LEVELS OF EFFORT AND TYPES OF INVESTIGATION 

A5-iv 

L. NATIONAL TRANSPORTATION SAFETY BOARD (NTSB) ... 34

L.1. INTRODUCTION...............................................................................................................................................................34

L.2. PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION .......................................................................................................................................34

L.3. NOTIFYING THE NTSB ...................................................................................................................................................35

L.4. THE COAST GUARD / NTSB RELATIONSHIP ...................................................................................................................35

L.4.a. NTSB-led Investigations .........................................................................................................................................35

L.4.b. Coast Guard-led Investigations..............................................................................................................................35

L.4.c. On-Scene Coast Guard Activities ...........................................................................................................................36

L.5. PARTICIPATING IN NTSB PROCEEDINGS.........................................................................................................................36

L.5.a. Introduction ............................................................................................................................................................36

L.5.b. Designated Parties .................................................................................................................................................36

L.5.c. NTSB Hearings.......................................................................................................................................................37

L.5.d. Testimony By Coast Guard Personnel....................................................................................................................37

L.5.e. Proposed Findings, Conclusions, And Recommendations......................................................................................37

L.5.f. Effects Upon Coast Guard Actions..........................................................................................................................37

L.6. ACTION ON NTSB REPORTS ...........................................................................................................................................38

FIGURE A5-1: COVER SHEET FOR TRANSCRIPTS OF FORMAL PROCEEDINGS ....................................................39

FIGURE A5-2: SAMPLE EXHIBIT WORKSHEET ............................................................................................................40

FIGURE A5-3: SAMPLE REPORTER'S CERTIFICATE ...................................................................................................41

FIGURE A5-4: SAMPLE DEPOSITION COVER SHEET..................................................................................................42

FIGURE A5-5: SAMPLE WRITTEN DEPOSITION ...........................................................................................................42

FIGURE A5-6: SAMPLE REPORTER'S CERTIFICATE FOR DEPOSITION ...................................................................45

FIGURE A5-7 :SAMPLE OFFICER'S CERTIFICATE........................................................................................................46
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART A: ADMINISTRATION

CHAPTER 5: LEVELS OF EFFORT AND TYPES OF INVESTIGATION 

A5-1 

A.1. DISCRETION 

IN DETERMINING THE 

APPROPRIATE 

INVESTIGATIVE 

LEVEL OF EFFORT

B.1. CASUALTIES

46 U.S.C. 6101 

B.1.a Major Marine Casualty 

An incident that meets any of the following criteria: 

B.1.b Public/Non-public Vessel Casualty 

A casualty involving a public vessel and a non-public vessel that meets any of the 

following criteria: 

-Resulted in at least one fatality. 

-Resulted in property damage initially estimated at $75,000 or more. 

B.1.c Significant Marine Casualty 

A casualty that is not a Major Marine Casualty but causes serious safety or 

environmental concerns, involves important safety issues, or causes substantial media 

interest. Significant marine casualties generally involve the following: 

A. DISCRETION

All incidents reported to the Coast Guard, regardless of the source, will be 

investigated, however, the OCMI/COTP must determine on a case-by-case basis 

what investigative actions are appropriate for a specific case based on the likely value 

to marine safety, available resources, and risks in a given port. This policy does not 

limit or change OCMI/COTP authority or responsibility to determine appropriate 

actions. For example, a minor collision (damage less than $25,000) of a towboat and 

a moored casino vessel may highlight significant safety concerns that would demand a 

formal investigation, or the OCMI/COTP may decide to conduct an informal 

investigation of three deaths from a fishing vessel sinking if the added cost and 

complexity of a formal investigation would not bring appreciable benefit. In such 

cases, the usual process of investigating, determining causal factors, reporting, 

entering information into MISLE, and record keeping must be followed. 

B. DEFINITIONS

-Resulted in the loss of six of more lives. 

-Resulted in the loss of mechanically propelled vessel of 100 or more gross tons. 

-Resulted in property damage initially estimated at $500,000 or more. 

-Resulted in serious threat, as determined by the Commandant and concurred in by 

the NTSB Chairman, to life, property, or the environment by hazardous materials. 

A public vessel is a vessel owned by the United States and includes a U.S. Coast 

Guard Vessel. 

-Multiple deaths or a single death caused by unusual circumstances. 

-Hazard to life, property, or the marine environment (e.g. sinking of a chlorine barge).

-Loss of any inspected vessel. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART A: ADMINISTRATION

CHAPTER 5: LEVELS OF EFFORT AND TYPES OF INVESTIGATION 

A5-2 

B.1.d Routine Incident 

B.1.e Loss of Life 

When determining when an incident is to be classified as a major marine casualty, 

public/non-public vessel casualty, or a significant marine casualty a life shall be 

considered lost when: 

B.1.f Loss of a Vessel 

When determining when an incident is to be classified as a major marine casualty, 

public/non-public vessel casualty, or a significant marine casualty a vessel shall be 

considered lost when: 

B.1.g Initially Estimated Property Damage 

C.1.

INTRODUCTION

All reports of incidents must be investigated to the extent provided for under 46 

U.S.C. 6301. The 1995 Quality Action Team on Marine Safety Investigations 

suggested that three levels of investigation beyond preliminary investigation are 

necessary: Data Collection, Informal, and Formal. MISLE data entry requirements 

for all levels of investigation shall be in accordance with the Investigations and 

Enforcement Process Guide. 

C.2. PRELIMINARY 

Any marine Casualty reportable under 46 CFR 4.05-1 but of lesser severity than a 

Significant Marine Casualty. 

-A person is known to be dead (e.g. the body has been recovered). 

-A person has been categorized as “presumed lost/dead” by agencies leading the 

search and rescue efforts. 

-The circumstances of the incident make recovery of a person alive unlikely. 

-The vessel is known or presumed to have been destroyed. 

-The vessel is presumed to have sunk and its location is unknown. 

-The vessel has sunk and its location is known, but it is unrecoverable. 

-The vessel is a constructive total loss, i.e. the vessel is so severely damaged that it is 

not financially worth recovering and/or repairing. 

When determining when an incident is to be classified as a major marine casualty, 

public/non-public vessel casualty, or a significant marine casualty initially estimated 

property damage only includes the cost of labor and materials to restore the vessel, 

facility or other properties involved to their conditions before the incident, but not 

include the cost of salvage, cleaning, gas-freeing, drydocking, or demurrage. 

C. GENERAL INFORMATION REGARDING LEVELS OF INVESTIGATIVE 

EFFORT

Preliminary Investigations are initial investigative efforts undertaken to ascertain 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART A: ADMINISTRATION

CHAPTER 5: LEVELS OF EFFORT AND TYPES OF INVESTIGATION 

A5-3 

INVESTIGATIONS

C.3. DATA 

COLLECTION 

ACTIVITIES

C.4. INFORMAL 

INVESTIGATIONS

C.5. FORMAL 

INVESTIGATIONS

D.1. ACTION ON 

VERIFIED INCIDENTS

D.1.a. General 

D.1.b. External Investigative Resources 

whether a report is genuine, how severe the incident is or will become, whether the 

Coast Guard has jurisdiction, whether other agencies or offices must be notified, and 

what level of Coast Guard investigative effort is necessary. As such, preliminary 

investigations have no jurisdictional boundaries until they are complete. Once a 

preliminary investigation verifies the above information, the cognizant investigative 

authority assigns the case for investigation as a data collection activity, informal 

investigation, or formal investigation, depending on severity and value to marine 

safety. 

Data Collection Activities do not require any significant investigative effort, and 

usually consist only of collecting basic factual information and entering it into MISLE 

for future reference and analysis. Only minimum follow-up to verify accuracy and 

completeness would be conducted if necessary. 

Informal Investigations are less exhaustive than formal investigations, but include the 

determination and reporting of the causal factors of a casualty. Generally, speaking, 

only incident investigations that include a marine casualty ever reach the level of 

informal investigation.

Formal Investigations are reserved for the more serious incidents investigated under 

46 USC Chapter 63 from which the most value can be gained. Marine Boards 

convened by the Commandant and other formal investigations convened by the 

District Commander or OCMI/COTP fit into this category. Only incident 

investigations that include a marine casualty ever reach the level of formal 

investigation. 

D. PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATIONS

A preliminary investigation shall be conducted for any report of evidence of a 

reportable marine casualty as defined in 46 CFR 4.05-1 involving a US or foreign flag 

commercial vessel. This includes reports of casualties by state numbered commercial 

vessels (e.g.: state numbered unispected towing vessels and fishing vessels) that report 

casualties under 33 CFR 173.55. A preliminary investigation begins when the Coast 

Guard is informed of a specific incident or situation, usually via a notification from 

the public. Oftentimes, a preliminary investigation is conducted solely over the 

telephone. When the preliminary investigation has gathered and verified sufficient 

factual information to determine the next course of action, the preliminary 

investigation is considered completed. The next course of action will be either 

nothing or the IO will recommend and/or execute, as appropriate, an upgrade in the 

level of investigation with possible additional notifications. 

When a local Memorandum of Understanding is in place, the OCMI/COTP may rely 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART A: ADMINISTRATION

CHAPTER 5: LEVELS OF EFFORT AND TYPES OF INVESTIGATION 

D.1.c. Identifying Major Marine Casualties, 

Significant Marine Casualties and Public/Non-public 

Vessel Casualties 

D.2. REQUIRED 

NOTIFICATIONS

D.2.a. General 

D.2.b. When CG-545 Shall Be Notified 

CG-545 shall be notified (directly or via the Commandant Command Center) for the 

following: 

• Major Marine Casualties 

• Significant Marine Casualties 

• Public/Non-Public Vessel Casualties 

D.2.c. When and How the National Response Center shall 

be Notified 

upon other agencies to perform some or all of the investigative work. When the 

Coast Guard will take no further action, there is no further data entry beyond a 

notification within MISLE. 

Identifying when an incident is a major marine casualty, significant marine casualty or 

a public/non-public vessel casualty shall be done as early as possible during the 

preliminary investigation, based on the information available at the time, even when 

that information may be incomplete or of questionable accuracy. In particular, when 

determining whether or not the property damage associated with an incident meets or 

exceeds the cost threshold in the criteria for each incident type the initial estimate 

should: 

-Focus on identifying whether the cost is above or below the threshold and not try to 

identify a specific cost. 

-Not be delayed to wait for the result of a formal assessment unless it can be obtained 

quickly (i.e. during the preliminary investigation). 

-Be assumed to be in excess of the threshold if it initially appears close to the 

threshold and it is believed a formal assessment may later indicate property damage in 

excess of the threshold. 

One of the most critical roles the IO fills is properly notifying the chain of command. 

Based upon post-incident notification, senior leaders in the Coast Guard are briefed, 

and CG-545 can fulfill its responsibilities such as notifying the NTSB, other Flag 

Administrations, DOJ, and the IMO. 

• Criminal Referrals 

Under various regulations, the responsible party is required to notify the National 

Response Center (NRC) of any discharge or release. In some cases the responsible 

party is not known, possibly because they have deliberately discharged or released, 

and no report to the NRC has been made. When Coast Guard personnel discover 

unknown-source discharges or releases, they shall report each such discharge or 

NRC 

1-800-424-8802 

A5-4 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART A: ADMINISTRATION

CHAPTER 5: LEVELS OF EFFORT AND TYPES OF INVESTIGATION 

A5-5 

D.2.d. How to notify CG-545 

During regular business hours, when required, the OCMI shall immediately notify 

CG-545 via their appropriate chain of command in the most rapid means available in 

one or more of the following methods: 

Phone: (202) 372-1029 

Fax: (202) 372-1907 

After regular business hours, when required, the OCMI shall immediately notify the 

Commandant Command Center (who will notify CG-545 if and when appropriate) 

via their appropriate chain of command in the following method: 

Place the call to the Commandant Command Center Duty Officer at 800-DADSAFE. 

D.2.e. Contents of the Notification 

The notifications should contain essential information, including the names of the 

vessels involved, their official numbers, nationality, the location, known and possible 

deaths and serious injuries, the nature of the casualty, potential criminal issues, and 

the MISLE incident investigation activity and case number. The OCMI shall also 

indicate the type of investigation they intend to conduct (formal/informal) and any 

recommendations to convene a Marine Board of Investigation or other formal 

investigation. The notification should also contain any requests made for assistance 

from the unit to the District Commander, Area Commander, or Commandant. 

When the case raises issues related to the performance Coast Guard safety functions, 

the nature of these issues must be explained. Coast Guard safety functions of 

particular note include: 

• Search and Rescue Activities; 

• Marine Inspection Activities; 

• Maintenance of Aids to Navigation; and 

release to the NRC so there are accurate tallies. Additionally, they shall remind the 

responsible party of their obligation to report the discharge or release to the NRC. 

The NRC shall be notified using their toll-free number: 1-800-424-8802. 

Note: All Major Marine Casualties are required to be reported to the Command 

Center IAW COMDINST 3100.8A, Critical Incident Reporting. This notification 

satisfies CG-545's reporting requirement to HQ. 

• Vessel Traffic Services 

E. DATA COLLECTION ACTIVITIES
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART A: ADMINISTRATION

CHAPTER 5: LEVELS OF EFFORT AND TYPES OF INVESTIGATION 

A5-6 

E.1. PURPOSE

E.2. PARTIES IN 

INTEREST

F.1. PURPOSE

F.2. WHEN TO 

CONDUCT AN 

INFORMAL 

INVESTIGATION

An informal investigation should be conducted for any casualty involving a U.S. or 

foreign flag commercial vessel, including state numbered commercial vessels, and 

meeting any of the below criteria: 

Death: One death. Death cases may be downgraded to Data Collection after 

credible evidence, such as a death certificate, indicates death from natural causes 

(including pre-existing medical condition) or suicide. 

Injury: One injury which results in fractured bones (other than fingers, toes or nose), 

loss of limbs, severe hemorrhaging, severe muscle, nerve tendon or internal organ 

damage, or in hospitalization form more than 48 hours within 5 days of the injury. 

Vessel loss: Loss of an uninspected vessel of less than 500 GT, or loss of a barge of 

Data collection activities are initiated when an upgrade in the level of investigation is 

required beyond the preliminary investigation. A data collection activity shall be 

conducted for all reportable marine casualties as defined in 46 CFR 4.05-1 not 

assigned to Informal or Formal Investigations. Data collection is the minimum level 

of investigation required when there will be no analysis, conclusions, or 

recommendations stemming from an investigation. They are intended to document 

the facts surrounding an incident for the public record and must meet the 

investigative obligations outlined in 46 U.S.C 6301. Enforcement referrals may be 

made from a data collection activity with the exception of an enforcement referral 

based upon information from a marine casualty (this must be informal at a 

minimum). 

IOs will not normally designate Parties in Interest for data collection activities 

resulting from a marine casualty investigation without a formal request for status. 

However, IOs should solicit all involved parties for evidence and/or witnesses. The 

IO should evaluate and respond to all requests for party in interest status. Whether or 

not Parties in Interest are designated, if a party meets the criteria of a party in interest, 

they can not be prohibited from participating in the investigation 

F. INFORMAL INVESTIGATIONS

Informal investigations are initiated when an upgrade in the level of investigation is 

required beyond the preliminary investigation and data collection activity but not to 

the level of a formal investigation. The purpose of the informal investigation is to 

expand upon information gathered during the preliminary investigation, discover and 

document the facts of the incident, conduct analysis, draw conclusions about the 

causes of the incident, draw conclusions as to whether there is evidence of offenses 

on the part of any person or organization, and recommend measures to prevent 

similar incidents from occurring. Accordingly, the scope of the investigation is 

limited to those topics and pieces of evidence that explain the cause and/or 

demonstrate evidence of an offense. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART A: ADMINISTRATION

CHAPTER 5: LEVELS OF EFFORT AND TYPES OF INVESTIGATION 

A5-7 

more than 100 GT on inland waters (as defined in 33 USC 2003). 

Property damage: An event involving a vessel and resulting in property damage 

exceeding $100,000 but less than $1,000,000. The damage value comprises the cost 

of labor and material to restore the property (vessels, shoreline facilities, pipelines, 

OCS facilities, etc.) to its original condition before the occurrence, but does not 

include damage to natural resources of the cost of salvage, cleaning, gas-freeing, drydocking, or demurrage. Damage values should be the best estimates available 

immediately following the accident. 

Collision/Allision: Any collision or allision resulting in property damage exceeding 

$25,000. 

Loss of propulsion or steering: Any loss of propulsion or steering, or partial loss 

of propulsion or steering (e.g. loss of one engine), even if momentary, affecting an 

inspected U.S. vessel anywhere or affecting a foreign flag vessel or an uninspected 

U.S. vessel or 100 GT on U.S. navigable waters. 

Flooding or fire: Flooding or fire that adversely affect a vessel’s fitness for service 

on an inspected U.S. vessel anywhere, or affecting a foreign flag vessel or an 

uninspected U.S. vessel over 100 GT on U.S. navigable waters. 

Equipment failure: Failure of Coast Guard approved primary lifesaving equipment 

or Coast Guard approved firefighting equipment. 

Discharge: Medium discharge of oil or medium release of a hazardous substance (as 

defined in 40 CFR 300.5), or of hazardous cargoes regulated under 46 CFR 

Subchapter O, in which a vessel is the source or the cause of the discharge or release. 

Commercial Diving Casualty: Death or injury of persons diving from a vessel for 

commercial purposes. 

F.3. PARTIES IN 

INTEREST

See 46 CFR 4.03-10 

F.4. OPEN 

PROCEEDINGS

F.5. OPENING THE 

INFORMAL 

Recreational Diving Casualty: Death or injury of persons diving from a vessel in 

federal waters for recreational purposes. 

IOs will not normally designate Parties in Interest as a part of an informal 

investigation of a marine casualty without a formal request for such status. The IO 

should evaluate and respond to all requests for party in interest status. In some 

incidents, people and organizations that may be designated in a formal investigation 

may participate in an informal investigation. As an open proceeding, those parties 

may request to be present during the interviewing of certain witnesses, to present 

evidence, and/or request to have certain witnesses interviewed. Whether or not 

Parties in Interest are designated, if a party meets the criteria of a party in interest, 

they can not be prohibited from participating in the investigation 

Informal investigative proceedings are open to the public. Accordingly, to the extent 

that such presence does not hinder the progress of the investigation, the press and 

public may be present while interviewing witnesses. 

No formal opening is required for informal investigations. Informal investigations 

are generally opened as directed by the standing orders of the OCMI/COTP. The 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART A: ADMINISTRATION

CHAPTER 5: LEVELS OF EFFORT AND TYPES OF INVESTIGATION 

A5-8 

PROCEEDINGS

G.1. TYPES OF 

FORMAL PROCEEDINGS

G.2. WHEN TO 

CONDUCT A FORMAL 

INVESTIGATION

A formal investigation should be conducted for any casualty involving a U.S. or 

foreign flag commercial vessel, including state numbered commercial vessels, and 

meeting any of the below criteria: 

Death: 2 or more deaths.

Injury: 2 or more seriously disabling injuries or 6 or more injures which result in 

fractured bones (other than fingers, toes or nose), loss of limbs, severe hemorrhaging, 

severe muscle, nerve tendon or internal organ damage, or in hospitalization form 

more than 48 hours within 5 days of the injury. 

Vessel loss: Loss of an inspected vessel, or loss of an uninspected vessel of 500 GT 

or more. 

Property damage: An event involving a vessel and resulting in property damage 

exceeding $1,000,000. The damage value comprises the cost of labor and material to 

restore the property (vessels, shoreline facilities, pipelines, OCS facilities, etc.) to its 

original condition before the occurrence, but does not include damage to natural 

resources of the cost of salvage, cleaning, gas-freeing, dry-docking, or demurrage. 

Damage values should be the best estimates available immediately following the 

accident. 

Discharge: Major discharge of oil or major release of a hazardous substance (as 

defined in 40 CFR 300.5), or of hazardous cargoes regulated under 46 CFR 

Subchapter O, in which a vessel is the source or the cause of the discharge or release. 

Foreign Flag Exception: A formal investigation is not required for a casualty 

involving only a foreign flag vessel (e.g. no U.S. vessel involved, no damage to U.S. 

property, and no injury of U.S. citizens). 

IO is not required to make a public notice regarding the opening of informal 

investigations, or any formal statement for the record of the investigation. Evidence 

and testimony are collected in as informal a setting as possible. 

G. FORMAL INVESTIGATIONS 

Formal proceedings may be initiated by the OCMI (Unit Formal), the District 

Commander (District Formal), and by the Commandant (Marine Board of 

Investigation, also referred to as a Marine Board). The Unit and District Formal 

Investigations are composed of a single IO designated by the OCMI or District 

Commander to receive evidence and testimony under formal rules (an additional IO 

is recommended to act as recorder). The duties of this IO are detailed in 46 CFR 

Part 4.07. A Marine Board is the highest level of investigative effort and may be 

initiated via the Port and Waterways Safety Act (PWSA) or 46 USC Chapter 63 

further detailed in 46 CFR 4.09-1 (for Marine Casualties). A Marine Board is 

composed of three or more officers designated by CG-545 to conduct the 

investigation under formal rules. Funding for formal proceedings is provided by the 

convening authority. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART A: ADMINISTRATION

CHAPTER 5: LEVELS OF EFFORT AND TYPES OF INVESTIGATION 

A5-9 

Barge Exception: A formal investigation is not required for the loss of a barge on 

inland waters as defined in 33 USC 2003. 

G.3. MARINE 

BOARD OF 

INVESTIGATION

G.3.a. Introduction 

G.3.b. Designation 

G.3.c. Precept 

G.3.d. Duties of the Chair 

The presiding officer of the Marine Board is the Chair. All members of the Marine 

Board and all IOs assigned to the Marine Board shall, unless otherwise directed, 

report to the Chair. The Chair shall control and direct the course of the investigation, 

including: 

• Leadership of investigative personnel; 

• Delegating authority to investigative personnel; 

• Assigning specific investigative duties; 

• Liaison with the cognizant District Commander and OCMI; 

• Liaison with CG-545; 

• Developing the strategy for the investigation and specific lines of inquiry; 

• Managing the ongoing preliminary investigation; 

• Developing and formally designating Parties in Interest; 

• Setting the rules of conduct for participation of Parties in Interest; 

• Recruiting and using any needed Coast Guard or other investigative 

The decision to convene a formal investigation is influenced primarily by the lessons 

to be derived from the incident. If the information to be derived has considerable 

national significance, or indicates vessel class problems or areas of technical 

importance, the Commandant may convene a Marine Board to assure that every 

aspect of the case is probed. Additionally, broad or intense public interest may 

warrant the formalities of a Marine Board. A Marine Board is usually composed of 

three or more members. The senior member shall be chairperson (also referred to as 

the Chair), the junior member the recorder. CG-545 may also designate specialists or 

technical experts to assist.

Designation of Marine Board members will be initiated by message, and subsequently 

confirmed by precept from the convening authority. Designation of Marine Board 

members is based on the nature of the casualty and the availability of qualified 

personnel. 

The precept is a letter written to the prospective Chair designating the members of 

the Marine Board and providing specific guidance about the topics to be covered 

during the course of the investigation. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART A: ADMINISTRATION

CHAPTER 5: LEVELS OF EFFORT AND TYPES OF INVESTIGATION 

A5-10 

resources; 

• Conducting regular briefings; and 

G.3.e. Duties of the Members 

G.3.f. Duties of the Recorder 

The recorder shall be governed by the instructions of the Chair in matters concerning 

the composition of the record, including exhibits and attachments, adjournment to 

other times and places, etc. As a member of the Marine Board, the recorder also acts 

as an independent contributor with regard to final conclusions and recommendations 

by the Marine Board. The recorder is responsible for the following: 

• Custody of: 

 Copies of appropriate charts; 

 Most recent vessel inspection records; 

 Plans of vessel(s); 

 Record of previous casualties, possibly related; 

 Message traffic on casualty; 

 Copies of statements of persons interviewed; 

 List of physical evidence;

 List of witnesses and status. (Will they be leaving the area and, therefore, 

need to be called early or have depositions taken?); 

 Course recorder tapes, automatic bell recorder record, charts, bell 

books, logs, and other vessel records. (These shall be taken into custody 

if still aboard the vessel.); 

 Photos of casualty; detailed photographs of significant areas that can 

assist witnesses in testifying; and 

 Photos of vital controls (e.g., engine-order telegraph settings in bridge 

and engine room, rudder angle indicator, position of rudder, sound 

powered phone selector settings, etc.). 

• Following up on the recovery of victims (their identification, where and when 

located, and by whom); elements/materials that may help identify victims 

should be called to the attention of the coroner or local authorities. 

• Notifying the cognizant U.S. Attorney via Coast Guard Legal in cases 

• Producing the Report of Investigation (ROI). 

Members of the Marine Board carry out the investigation of the incident under the 

control and direction of the Chair. While the Chair sets the strategy and assigns 

duties, the members assume the tactical control of the investigation and will normally 

oversee specific elements of the preliminary investigation, propose witnesses to 

interview and evidence to examine, conduct the questioning of specific witnesses, and 

so on. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART A: ADMINISTRATION

CHAPTER 5: LEVELS OF EFFORT AND TYPES OF INVESTIGATION 

A5-11 

involving government vessels or potential claims against the government. 

• Advising Parties in Interest of their designation and rights. 

• Advising Parties in Interest and others who will testify as to what documents 

(logbooks, charts in use, blueprints, notes, etc.) they are required to bring with 

them. 

• Preparing information for the Chair's opening statement. 

• Supervising arrangement of tables and seating; arranging the needs of the 

witness and board members including such things as drinking water. 

• Arranging for staff support to handle the call and return of witnesses, run 

errands, etc. 

• Calling or e-mailing CG-545 each day with a summary of the day's 

proceedings (to be relayed to the Commandant). This should outline the 

important points of testimony without evaluation or comment. If practical, 

the call or e-mail should be made about 0730 Eastern Standard Time, so that

the information can be promptly presented to the Commandant at the 

morning briefing. 

G.4. DISTRICT 

FORMAL 

INVESTIGATION

G.4.a. Introduction 

The authority to convene a District Formal Investigation is found in 46 CFR 4.07-1. 

As with the decision to convene a Marine Board, the decision to convene a District 

Formal Investigation is influenced primarily by the lessons to be derived from the 

casualty. If the information to be derived has considerable regional significance, or 

indicates vessel class problems or areas of technical importance, the District 

Commander may convene a formal investigation to assure that every aspect of the 

case is probed. Additionally, broad or intense public interest may warrant the 

formalities of a District Formal Investigation. A District Formal Investigation is 

composed of one specially designated Lead Investigating Officer (LIO) as the 

presiding officer. The District Commander may also designate specialists or technical 

experts to assist the LIO. 

G.4.b. Designation 

• Promptly advising the Chair if it appears that substantial additional expenses 

must be incurred. After due consideration by the Marine Board, CG-545 

should be fully advised. 

The LIO designated to convene a District Formal Investigation will be notified by 

message, and subsequently confirmed by precept. Designation of the LIO and 

recorder is based on the nature of the casualty and the availability of qualified 

personnel. An officer having broad marine experience is selected, usually a SIO or 

CID with a strong IO background. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART A: ADMINISTRATION

CHAPTER 5: LEVELS OF EFFORT AND TYPES OF INVESTIGATION 

A5-12 

G.4.c. Precept 

G.5. UNIT FORMAL 

INVESTIGATION

G.5.a. Introduction 

G.5.b. Designation 

G.5.c. Precept 

H.1. PRELIMINARY 

INVESTIGATION

H.1.a. Conduct and Scope of the Preliminary 

Investigation 

The precept is a letter written to an officer designating him or her as the LIO to 

conduct a District Formal Investigation and providing specific guidance about the 

topics to be covered during the course of the investigation. An example of a precept 

letter is included in the Appendix. 

OCMIs are delegated the authority and responsibility to direct the investigation of 

marine casualties, and to designate IOs to execute these responsibilities. Any such 

investigations may be conducted under the formal rules in Title 46 CFR Part 4.07 

when the issues involved suggest the scrutiny of a formal proceeding, or when press 

or public interest demand formal proceedings. 

Any marine casualty qualified marine investigator designated as the LIO by the 

OCMI to conduct marine casualty investigations within their Area of Responsibility 

(AOR) may conduct Unit Formal Investigations. No additional or case-by-case 

designation is necessary. The OCMI may also designate IOs or other personnel to 

assist the LIO with conducting the formal investigation. 

The unit’s organization manual will normally contain the specific duties that the IO is 

expected to execute, and these serve as a precept for Unit Formal Investigations. 

OCMIs may, when appropriate, issue a precept for a specific investigation. 

H. CONDUCT OF FORMAL PROCEEDINGS

When an incident occurs, the investigation into the circumstances should begin 

immediately. When a formal investigation seems appropriate, a preliminary 

investigation is necessary to determine what witnesses and evidence the formal 

sessions will examine. The use of a sufficient number of field IOs is vital in swiftly 

gathering a maximum amount of evidence. This information serves to determine the 

general topics about which witnesses will testify and the most appropriate order of 

their appearance. In the case of survivors arriving as a group, it is sometimes best to 

serve subpoenas for appearance at the unit or another suitable place for preliminary 

interviews. The preliminary investigation shall not be stopped when it appears that 

the casualty will become a “unit formal”, “district formal,” or "marine board” case. 

When a presiding officer (either the Chair or designated IO) over formal proceedings 

is named, the OCMI shall transfer control and direction of the preliminary 

investigation to the presiding officer of the formal proceedings. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART A: ADMINISTRATION

CHAPTER 5: LEVELS OF EFFORT AND TYPES OF INVESTIGATION 

A5-13 

H.1.b. Transition from Informal Investigation 

H.1.b. Selection of Witnesses for Formal Proceedings 

H.1.c. Selection of Evidence for the Formal 

Proceedings 

H.1.d. Support of Formal Proceedings 

Prior to convening of hearings the Marine Board or IO shall be provided with all 

necessary assistance by the cognizant District Commander. Legal assistance shall be 

provided during the investigation and, if Coast Guard personnel are called to testify, 

they shall be provided legal representation. If the Marine Board or IO intends to call 

Coast Guard personnel as witnesses, the presiding officer should obtain permission 

from the District Commander. If additional legal resources are necessary, they shall 

be provided by the Area Commander or Maintenance and Logistics Commander. 

Technical assistance from Marine Safety Center (MSC) personnel shall be provided as 

requested by the presiding officer; if necessary, additional assistance may be obtained 

from Office of Engineering Standards, Commandant (CG-521). The District 

Commander shall provide clerical personnel to the formal proceedings for use as 

necessary. The hiring of commercial court reporting services will be authorized 

by the inclusion of the following paragraph in the Commandant's precept: 

During the period after the casualty but before the initiated formal proceedings, the 

preliminary investigation directed by the OCMI should continue. The information 

developed during the preliminary investigation must be collated and presented to the 

presiding officer of the formal proceedings so that hearings can be convened. Upon 

designation, control of the investigation shifts from the OCMI to the presiding 

officer. By agreement with the OCMI, the investigative resources at the unit may be 

employed by the presiding officer to continue or complete the preliminary 

investigation. The preliminary investigation is deemed complete when the presiding 

officer has sufficient information to schedule witnesses, admit evidence, and set a 

date for hearings. 

Based on the preliminary investigation and prior to the convening of formal hearings, 

the recorder or IO must develop a schedule of witness testimony, along with a brief 

one-paragraph statement of expected testimony. This list should be circulated to the 

Parties in Interest (if designated) for comment prior to finalization. The schedule of 

witnesses should be made publicly available prior to the hearings. 

As with witnesses, based on the preliminary investigation the recorder or IO should 

develop a list of evidence that they hope to enter as exhibits into the case. In some 

cases this will require the calling of certain witnesses to authenticate and/or explain 

the evidence at hand. A list of prospective evidence to be entered as exhibits, along 

with associated witnesses, should be circulated to the Parties in Interest (if 

designated) for comment prior to finalization. The list of evidence to be introduced 

need not be made publicly available prior to the hearings. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART A: ADMINISTRATION

CHAPTER 5: LEVELS OF EFFORT AND TYPES OF INVESTIGATION 

A5-14 

H.1.e. Operational Control of Investigating Officers 

H.2. PARTIES IN 

INTEREST

H.2.a. Introduction 

H.2.b. Definition 

H.2.c. Designation 

A person or organization, other than those specifically listed by statute, becomes a 

Party in Interest only after formal designation by the presiding officer. The following 

may be designated as Parties in Interest when they can demonstrate a connection 

with the casualty or accident under investigation, though this is not an exhaustive or 

exclusive listing: 

• The individual, organization, or other entity whose conduct is under 

investigation. When their conduct is at issue, this includes an owner, 

charterer, agent of such owner or charterer, licensed officer, or holder of any 

certificate of service, or any other person; 

• The lawful representative of a person, organization, or other entity who 

would have been designated a party in interest under criteria (a) above, but 

"When deemed appropriate for the proper and orderly functioning of this Marine 

Board of Investigation, the District Commander is authorized to negotiate for 

commercial court reporting services pursuant to 10 USC 2304(a)(4). This 

authorization satisfies the requirements of USCG Procurement Regulations 11-

3.204(b)(1) for Commandant (CG-85) approval prior to negotiation of contracts for 

personal and professional services. If district funds are not available, comply with the 

Manual of Budgetary Administration, COMDTINST M7100.3." 

IOs assigned at any field office remain under the operational control of the OCMI. 

When a formal investigation is convened (as a Marine Board, District Formal, or Unit 

Formal), a preliminary investigation will always be required. In some cases, this will 

require expertise and manpower additional to that provided on the Marine Board or 

by the LIO. In such cases, the Commandant, District Commander, or Commanding 

Officer should make arrangements to detail IOs to the operational control of the 

presiding officer. Without such a detail, unit IOs should expect to continue the 

preliminary investigation to the extent necessary once the Marine Board and/or IO 

have arrived on scene. 

The formal designation and inclusion of Parties in Interest is perhaps the most 

distinctive aspect of a formal proceeding. Because all parties with a stake in the 

outcome of the investigation are involved from the outset, the investigation develops 

better and more relevant information than might otherwise be possible. 

A party in interest, as defined in 46 USC 6303 and 46 CFR 4.03-10, includes any 

individual, organization, or entity that a Marine Board or IO finds to have a direct 

interest in the investigation being conducted, as well as those specifically listed in the 

statute. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART A: ADMINISTRATION

CHAPTER 5: LEVELS OF EFFORT AND TYPES OF INVESTIGATION 

A5-15 

who has lost their life in the casualty under investigation; 

• The individual, organization, or other entity that is a manufacturer, owner, 

shipper, shipyard, supplier, time or space charterer, or other cargo interest, 

when there is an indication that cargo caused or contributed to the cause of 

the casualty; 

• The individual, organization, or other entity is an underwriter or insurer of a

party in interest as designated under the criteria in the first or third bullet 

above, when the underwriter or insurer has, at the time of investigation, 

succeeded to the rights of the party in interest by means of subrogation; or 

H.2.d. Status before Designation 

H.2.e. Representation by Counsel 

H.2.f. Special rights under 46 CFR part 4 

H.2.g. Role in the Proceeding 

• Any individual, organization, or other entity that can demonstrate the 

potential for contributing significantly to the completeness of the 

investigation, or otherwise enhancing the safety of life and property at sea, 

through participation as a party in interest (e.g., a maritime labor union, pilot's 

association, standards making organization, or an individual or corporation 

incurring damages as a result of the casualty). 

People and organizations that not statutorily defined as parties in interest but are 

designated later as Parties in Interest have no special rights under 46 CFR part 4 until 

such time as they are designated by the presiding officer. Accordingly, they may not 

call or examine witnesses or offer evidence until such time as they are formally 

designated as Parties in Interest. 

Under 46 USC 6303, a party in interest may be represented by legal counsel during 

formal proceedings. Counsel is present to advise the party in interest in the pursuit 

of the investigation’s purposes, and may not act as prosecutor or defense for their 

client. Accordingly, the presiding officer should make it clear that he or she will 

exercise appropriate control in conducting the investigation, and that evidence, 

questions, and testimony deemed irrelevant to the purposes of the investigation will 

not be allowed. A party in interest (such as a corporation) will normally be required to 

speak through a single representative.

Each designated party in interest at a formal proceeding, whether conducted by a 

Marine Board or IO, shall be accorded all the rights set forth in 46 USC 6303. 

Specifically, those rights are: to be represented by counsel, introduce evidence, crossexamine witnesses, and to call witnesses in his or her own behalf. These rights 

should be explained at the beginning of the investigation and again, as necessary, 

when Parties in Interest are designated during the course of the investigation. 

Parties in Interest are designated to assure that the Coast Guard has the fullest 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART A: ADMINISTRATION

CHAPTER 5: LEVELS OF EFFORT AND TYPES OF INVESTIGATION 

A5-16 

H.2.h. Process for Parties to Exercise their Rights 

H.3. OPEN 

PROCEEDINGS

H.4. PRESS AND 

PUBLIC RELATIONS

H.4.a. Introduction 

H.4.b. Pre-convening News Release 

possible accounting of the circumstances surrounding an incident. To that end, the 

role of the Parties in Interest is to serve the purposes of the investigation. Parties in 

Interest may not use the formal investigation as a means for discovering material for 

use in civil legal proceedings or for other reasons. Parties in Interest should be 

reminded of their proper role during the preliminary meeting with the Marine Board 

or IO. 

Parties in Interest should be advised during the preliminary meeting that they may call 

only those witnesses which the Chair or Lead Investigating Officer (LIO) deems 

relevant to the investigation. Accordingly, Parties in Interest should submit a list of 

witnesses and a brief paragraph of expected testimony to the Chair or LIO for 

approval. Similarly, subpoenas may be issued by the Chair or LIO when necessary to 

obtain evidence or testimony suggested by Parties in Interest and deemed relevant. 

When Parties in Interest attempt to exceed the scope of the investigation, the Chair 

or LIO may order them to move on to other subjects or, in an extreme case, 

terminate the party’s examination of a witness. 

Coast Guard investigative proceedings, including formal proceedings, are open to the 

public and press under Title 46 USC Chapter 63. Requests to attend investigative 

proceedings should not normally be declined unless the presiding officer has a 

reasonable, articulated belief that public or press attendance will undermine or limit 

the ability of investigators to obtain information freely. Witnesses should be 

informed that the contents of their statements/interviews will be made public. Sitesafety, as well as procedures for securing the scene and collecting evidence, usually 

dictate that the public not be allowed free access to the accident scene. 

Often, there is considerable local or national interest in casualties under investigation 

by a Marine Board. Reporters are entitled to attend open sessions of a Marine Board, 

as are members of the public; cooperation with news media interests is encouraged to 

the extent that they do not detract from the decorum of the proceedings or inhibit a 

witness' willingness to testify. Media coverage of marine casualty investigations will 

serve to increase the public's awareness of those conditions and practices that

precipitate marine casualties, as well as the Coast Guard. 

The presiding officer should, in consultation with the cognizant Public Affairs Office, 

prepare a brief press release. The release should contain highlights of facts about the 

casualty known to date, the commencement time and location of the formal 

proceedings, and the procedures to be followed by the media for obtaining 

permission to conduct expanded media coverage, which involves any manner of 

audio or video coverage. It should also specify that media representatives will be 

required to make pooling arrangements as described in Section B.6.i. below, and that 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART A: ADMINISTRATION

CHAPTER 5: LEVELS OF EFFORT AND TYPES OF INVESTIGATION 

A5-17 

H.4.c. Expanded Media Coverage 

H.4.d. Requests for Expanded Media Coverage. 

A request for expanded media coverage must be submitted to the presiding officer at 

least one day in advance of the proceeding. All Parties in Interest must be notified of 

such requests prior to commencement of the proceeding. The presiding officer may 

permit coverage without the requisite notice if extraordinary conditions establish that 

the necessity to give notice was not foreseeable. All request shall include: 

• The subject, date, and time of the proceeding; 

• A description of the type (audio, video, or still photography) of expanded 

media coverage which is planned; and 

H.4.e. Ruling on Request for Expanded Media Coverage 

When the presiding officer receives a request from the news media for expanded 

media coverage, they must formally rule on the request within a reasonable time prior 

to the proceeding. Expanded media coverage shall be presumed to be permissible 

unless the presiding officer makes a finding establishing: 

• A substantial probability that expanded media coverage would interfere with 

the rights of the parties to a fair hearing; 

• A substantial probability that expanded media coverage would unduly detract 

from the solemnity, decorum and dignity of the proceedings; 

• That a particular participant would be more adversely affected by expanded

media coverage than would be members of the public in general (e.g., a very 

young child), and that the expanded media coverage would more adversely 

affect that participant than would traditional media coverage (e.g., a witness 

who was disfigured during the marine casualty in question); or 

• A violation of the guidelines or additional rules imposed by the presiding 

officer. 

all members of the press and public are welcome to attend the formal proceedings. 

Expanded media coverage is coverage of proceedings by audio or video recording, 

television or radio broadcasting, cable television transmission, still or motion picture 

photography, or by any other audio or video medium of communication to the 

public. The Coast Guard's policy is to permit expanded media coverage of marine 

casualty investigations conducted under the provisions of 46 USC 630l to the 

maximum extent possible and consistent with the proper and orderly functioning of 

the investigation. 

Whether a pooling arrangement (see Section B.6.i. below) has been reached, and 

if so, the designated media representatives. 

Any member of the press, party in interest, or witness may lodge a written objection 

to the presiding officer’s ruling on expanded media coverage of a proceeding. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART A: ADMINISTRATION

CHAPTER 5: LEVELS OF EFFORT AND TYPES OF INVESTIGATION 

A5-18 

Note: Extreme 

Close-up video or 

photography 

entails zooming 

in or magnifying 

to show the 

subject from a 

closer 

perspective than 

you would 

ordinarily see. 

H.4.f. Limitations on Expanded Media Coverage. 

Notwithstanding an authorization to conduct expanded media coverage of a 

proceeding, the following limitations apply: 

• Bench conferences shall not be recorded by audio or by extreme close-up 

video or photography; 

• Confidential communications between counsel and client or co-counsel shall 

not be recorded by audio or by extreme close-up video or photography; and 

H.4.g. Conduct of Members of the Press 

Media representatives shall conduct themselves in a manner consistent with the 

decorum and dignity of the hearing. The following practices shall be observed in this 

regard: 

• All equipment employed to provide expanded media coverage shall be 

positioned in as inconspicuous an area as possible and operated to minimize 

any distraction; 

• Identifying marks, call letters, logos, symbols, and legends shall be concealed 

on all equipment. Personnel shall not wear clothing bearing any insignia or 

identification of the individual or media organization involved; and 

H.4.h. Expanded Media Coverage Equipment Limitations 

• Video: Only one television organization at a time shall be permitted to 

operate a television camera in the hearing room. That organization shall 

employ only one television camera and one camera operator who shall remain 

in a single location while the hearing is in session. 

• Audio: The media shall use the hearing room's audio system if technically 

feasible, ensuring that this does not interfere with the investigative body's use 

of the system. If the hearing room's system is not technically suitable, then all 

audio recording shall be done on one audio system, installed by the media at 

Objections should be considered and formally addressed when making decisions on 

expanded media coverage. The ruling must briefly state the reasons for approval or 

denial of the request. The ruling should be announced on the record and in writing. 

Subsequent objections should be considered an appeal of the presiding officer’s 

decision. Such appeals should be handled in accordance with Section G.5. below. 

• Extreme close-up photography of parties to the investigation or members of 

the Marine Board is not permitted. 

• Equipment involved in expanded media coverage shall not be placed in, or 

removed from, the hearing room except prior to the commencement or after

adjournment of proceedings each day, or during a recess. Neither television 

film, magazines, videocassettes, nor still camera film or lenses shall be 

changed within a hearing room except during a recess in the proceedings. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART A: ADMINISTRATION

CHAPTER 5: LEVELS OF EFFORT AND TYPES OF INVESTIGATION 

A5-19 

their expense. Microphones and related wiring shall be unobtrusive and shall 

not interfere with the movement of those in the hearing room. When 

requested, copies of recorded testimony will be provided to the investigative 

body. 

• Still Cameras: One still photographer using an unobtrusive tripod and 

cameras that make as little noise as possible shall take all photographs. The 

photographer shall remain in a single location while the hearing is in session. 

H.4.i. Pooling Arrangements 

H.5. APPEAL OF 

RULINGS BY THE 

CHAIR OR LEAD 

INVESTIGATING 

OFFICER

H.6. DAILY 

SUMMARY

The presiding officer shall assure that an informal daily summary of each day's 

session is prepared. This summary should report important testimony without 

evaluation or comment, clearly phrased in the language of an objective reporter and 

recounting no more than: "Master X said that he was on the right side of the 

channel"; "The coroner said that pilot Y's blood alcohol level was 0.10 percent"; and 

"The Chair denied a request by attorney Z that his client be named a party in 

interest," etc. It is also desirable to include an advance list of the next witnesses to 

testify. 

• Lighting: No additional lighting equipment shall be permitted. 

The media shall be solely responsible for designating one representative to conduct 

each category of expanded media coverage listed in this instruction. It is also the 

media's responsibility to arrange an open and impartial distribution scheme and to 

establish a distribution point outside of the hearing room. If an agreement cannot be 

reached on these matters, then there shall be no expanded media coverage of the type 

for which no pooling arrangement was made. The presiding officer shall not be 

called upon to resolve these kinds of disputes. 

Any member of the press, any party in interest, or any witness may appeal a ruling by 

the presiding officer to the convening authority of the proceeding. Appeals should 

be submitted in writing to Commandant, the District Commander, or OCMI. All 

appeals will be processed in accordance with the rules in 46 CFR 1.03 – Rights of 

Appeal. The decision of the convening authority on appeals shall be included in the 

record of the formal proceeding. 

For Marine Boards, the daily status report shall be submitted by the most efficient 

means to CG-545. For District and Unit Formal Investigations, the daily status 

report shall be submitted by the most efficient means to CG-545, the District 

Commander (dp) and the OCMI. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART A: ADMINISTRATION

CHAPTER 5: LEVELS OF EFFORT AND TYPES OF INVESTIGATION 

A5-20 

I.1.

INTRODUCTION

I.2. OPENING THE 

FORMAL PROCEEDINGS

I.2.a. Preliminary Meeting 

Prior to the formal opening of proceedings, the investigative body should meet with 

all involved Parties in Interest and/or their designated representative or legal council, 

to discuss how the proceedings will be conducted. The presiding officer will 

announce the ground rules for the proceedings, which include but are not limited to 

the following: 

• A prohibition of smoking while the formal proceeding is in session (this shall 

be announced at the opening of the hearing); 

• Provision for appropriate rest breaks; 

• Provision that, if more than one counsel is present on behalf of a party in 

interest, only one of them may act as a spokesperson and be identified as 

such; 

• Procedures for making and distributing duplicates of exhibits required by 

Parties in Interest during recesses or when the formal proceeding is not in 

session; 

• Resolution of witness scheduling and special problems regarding availability 

of witnesses or evidence; 

• Any visits deemed necessary by the presiding officer to the casualty site by the 

investigative body and Parties in Interest; and 

I.2.b. Opening Statement 

At the opening of formal proceedings, the presiding officer shall deliver an opening 

statement. An example is provided below: 

Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. I am [Name, rank, position]. The [name of 

the convening authority, i.e.:Commandant/District Commander/OCMI] has directed 

me to chair this [Marine Board of Investigation/ District Formal Investigation/Unit 

Formal Investigation], which [he/she] has convened under the authority of Title 46 

USC 6301 and Title 46 CFR Part 4, to investigate the circumstances surrounding 

[incident description/date/location.] [We/I] will conduct the investigation under the 

I. OPENING THE PROCEEDINGS

The following section outlines the general process to be followed by the Marine 

Board or IO in the conduct of formal proceedings. Such proceedings shall be viewed 

as an opportunity for the Coast Guard to illustrate publicly the importance of marine 

investigations and the ramifications of such a casualty to safety, mobility, and the 

environment. 

• Procedures for handling objections. Any matters of contention should be 

resolved at the preliminary meeting, so that the record is not cluttered with 

subsequent objections. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART A: ADMINISTRATION

CHAPTER 5: LEVELS OF EFFORT AND TYPES OF INVESTIGATION 

A5-21 

rules in Title 46 CFR Part 4. 

Introduction of the Marine Board (when applicable) 

The officer on my right is [name/rank], who is attached to the [unit/position]. The 

officer to his right is [name/rank] who is attached to [unit/position]. He is also 

serving as recorder. [Name/rank], [name/rank], and I will make up the composition 

of this Marine Board of Investigation. This Marine Board will submit its report of 

findings, conclusions, and recommendations to the Commandant of the United 

States Coast Guard. 

Introduction of NTSB Representative (when applicable) 

Present at this investigation is Mr. [name], representing the National Transportation 

Safety Board. He is seated to my left. The National Transportation Safety Board is 

also charged with the responsibility for the determination of cause or probable cause 

of a major casualty under the provisions of Section 304(a)(1)(E) of the Independent 

Safety Board Act of 1974. For this reason the National Transportation Safety Board 

representative will participate fully in this investigation and may make 

recommendations about the scope of the investigation, may call and examine 

witnesses, and may submit or request additional evidence. 

Public and Press Participation 

I would like to request the cooperation of all persons present to minimize any 

disruptive influence on the proceedings in general and on the witnesses in particular. 

Smoking will be prohibited. Photography, including television cameras, will only be 

permitted during this opening statement and during recess periods. The members of 

the press are, of course, welcome, and an area has been set aside for your use during 

the proceedings. All cameras shall be removed from the room following this 

statement. The news media may question witnesses concerning the testimony that 

they have given after I have released them. I ask that such interviews be conducted 

outside this room. 

Purposes of the Investigation 

This investigation is intended to determine the cause of the casualty to the extent 

possible and the responsibility thereof, subject to final review and approval by the 

[Commandant/District Commander/OCMI], and to obtain information for the 

purpose of preventing or reducing the effects of similar casualties in the future. This 

investigation is also intended to determine if there is evidence that any incompetence, 

misconduct, unskillfullness, or willful violation of the law on the part of any licensed 

officer, pilot, seaman, employee, owner, or agent of such owner of any vessel 

involved or any inspector, officer of the Coast Guard, or other officer or employee of 

the United States, or any other person, caused or contributed to the cause of this 

casualty; or if there is evidence that any act in violation of any of the provisions of the 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART A: ADMINISTRATION

CHAPTER 5: LEVELS OF EFFORT AND TYPES OF INVESTIGATION 

A5-22 

United States Code or any of the regulations issued there under was committed. 

[This Marine Board is/I am] also empowered to recognize any commendable actions 

by persons involved, and to make appropriate recommendations in this regard. 

Parties in Interest 

A person may be designated as a “party in interest” by reason of his or her position 

or part in the casualty. They are not necessarily suspected of wrongdoing. Parties in 

Interest are those who, under the existing facts or because of their position, may, in 

any way, be responsible for or have contributed to the casualty. A person is named a 

party in interest so that they may have an opportunity to protect themselves if facts 

develop that are adverse in nature to them. A party in interest may be named during 

the course of this investigation if it appears that he or she may, in any way, have been 

responsible for or may have contributed to the cause of the casualty. I may designate 

additional Parties in Interest if, during the course of the investigation, such 

designation is necessary and appropriate. 

All Parties in Interest have a statutory right to be present, to be represented by 

counsel, to cross-examine, and to have witnesses called in their behalf. Witnesses 

who are not designated as Parties in Interest may be assisted by counsel for the 

purpose of advising them concerning their rights; however, such counsels are not 

permitted to examine or cross-examine other witnesses or otherwise participate. 

I have designated the following individuals and firms as Parties in Interest: [list all 

Parties in Interest] 

Testimony under Oath 

[The Marine Board / I] will place all witnesses under oath. When testifying under 

oath, a witness is subject to the Federal laws and penalties for perjury for making false 

statements under 18 USC 1001. Penalties included a fine up to $250,000, or 

imprisonment up to 5 years, or both. 

Call for Assistance 

The sources of information into which this investigation will inquire are many and 

varied. The investigative resources of the Coast Guard have made attempts to locate 

every available piece of evidence having a pertinent bearing on the casualty. 

[This Marine Board/I] will hear all such evidence. Should any person have or believe 

he or she has information not brought forward but which might be of direct 

significance, that person is urged to bring that information to my attention. 

Recognition of Lives Lost (if applicable) 

At this time I would like to ask that all of you stand for a moment of silence in 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART A: ADMINISTRATION

CHAPTER 5: LEVELS OF EFFORT AND TYPES OF INVESTIGATION 

A5-23 

respect to those persons who have been lost as a result of this casualty. 

(All present stand.) 

I.3. MARINE 

BOARD AND 

INVESTIGATING 

OFFICER OATHS /

AFFIRMATION

Immediately following the Opening Statement, all members of the Marine Board or 

the IO (and court reporter if applicable) shall take the following oath on the record: 

(NOTE: The words "so help me God" are omitted when an affirmation is given.) 

I.4. RECEIVING 

TESTIMONY

I.4.a. Exclusion of Witnesses 

I.4.b. Appearances 

I.4.c. Oaths for Interpreters 

When a witness requires an interpreter, the interpreter must be placed under oath 

prior to placing the witness under oath or examining the witness. Every interpreter 

employed during an investigation shall be sworn in or affirmed using the following 

oath/affirmation: 

I.4.d. Oaths for Witnesses 

Before giving testimony, witnesses shall be required to stand while the oath or 

affirmation is administered, after which the witness may sit down. The recorder or 

This concludes the opening statement. Thank you for your attention. [The Marine 

Board/I] will now take the oath, after which I will give the representatives of the 

media an opportunity to ask me a few questions. Following a ten-minute recess 

[we/I] will call the first witness. 

"I [name] swear/affirm that I will faithfully perform all the duties incumbent upon 

me as [a member of this Marine Board of Investigation/the designated Investigating 

Officer], and that I will examine and inquire into the matter now before me without 

partiality [so help me God]." 

When the recorder calls the first witness, all other witnesses (with the exception of 

Parties in Interest) should be excused from the room and moved to a separate 

designated waiting area. This waiting area shall be far removed from the primary 

hearing location so that witnesses cannot hear or be aware of any testimony

presented to the board. 

Prior to receiving testimony during each session of the proceeding, the recorder or 

IO shall call for and receive appearances by counsel for the Parties in Interest or for 

the witnesses. This may be done with a simple request made on the record: “At this 

time I would like to have appearances for the record. Would counsel for Parties in 

Interest and witnesses please identify themselves?” 

"Do you, Mr./Ms. XXXX, swear/affirm that you will faithfully perform the duties of 

interpreter in this investigation [so help you God]?"
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART A: ADMINISTRATION

CHAPTER 5: LEVELS OF EFFORT AND TYPES OF INVESTIGATION 

A5-24 

LIO shall administer the following oath/affirmation: 

I.4.e. Use of Subpoenas 

I.4.f. Refusal of Witnesses to Testify 

I.4.g. Preliminary Questions 

The cooperation and memory of a witness can best be served by making the person 

feel at ease. Often when questioning is prolonged or the witness is very nervous, a 

short recess will ease the witness' apprehension. The witness should be treated in a 

firm but courteous manner. All questions should be delivered firmly and clearly, and 

an adequate answer shall be insisted upon before proceeding to the next question. 

Generally, the following information should be obtained from a witness: 

• Name and home address of the witness. 

• Whether or not the witness, when designated a party in interest, has counsel. 

• Information from the witness' document or license. 

• The witness' age and experience. Experience includes how long the witness 

had been sailing prior to the casualty, the position held at the time of the 

casualty, and the length of employment in that position on the vessel 

involved. 

• Witness status onboard the vessel if a crewmember, where the witness was 

and how he was occupied at the time of the casualty. 

"A false statement given to an agency of the United States is punishable by fine 

and/or imprisonment under 18 USC 1001. Knowing this, do you solemnly swear 

that the testimony you are about to give will be the truth, the whole truth, and 

nothing but the truth, [so help you God?]" 

In all instances, Marine Boards and other formal investigations shall be convened 

under such authority allowing the use of subpoenas. The use of subpoenas is 

governed by the general policy in Chapter A3 of this volume. The use of subpoenas 

to assure attendance of witnesses, even when deemed cooperative, is encouraged but 

is at the discretion of the presiding officer. 

As with all investigations, persons may elect not to give testimony, and nothing in 

existing law supersedes or contravenes the Fifth Amendment. Accordingly, witnesses 

may refuse to testify during formal proceedings, but the witness’s intent to do so 

should have been well understood by means of the preliminary investigation. 

Accordingly, witnesses who will take the Fifth Amendment protection and refuse to 

testify should be placed before the Marine Board during formal proceedings only for 

the purpose of putting their refusal to testify into the record. As with any 

investigation wherein a witness refuses the testify, the Chair or Lead Investigating 

Officer (LIO) may pursue legal action to compel testimony as described in Chapter 

A3 of this volume in consultation with their servicing District Legal Office. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART A: ADMINISTRATION

CHAPTER 5: LEVELS OF EFFORT AND TYPES OF INVESTIGATION 

A5-25 

• A subjective statement of the circumstances that resulted in the casualty. The 

witness should not be interrupted during this statement. Notes should be 

made upon which to base specific questions after completion of the 

statement. 

I.4.h. Order of Questioning 

I.4.i. Concluding the Testimony 

I.4.j. Recall of Witnesses 

If a witness is recalled, the witness shall be informed: 

"You are cautioned that the oath (affirmation) you took previously is still binding." 

I.5. RECEIVING 

EVIDENCE

I.5.a. General 

• Sufficient questions to elicit as much information concerning the casualty as 

the witness can supply. 

Direct examination should continue until the Marine Board or LIO is satisfied. After 

direct examination, counsel for the witness is then permitted to ask questions, 

followed by counsel for other Parties in Interest. The investigative body may raise 

subsequent questions at any time. The investigative body should be guided by the 

investigation process outlined in Part B of this volume. 

It is always advisable, before concluding an interview, to ask the witness for any 

information concerning the casualty that has not been elicited. In view of the Coast 

Guard's many missions, the investigation should thoroughly cover, if applicable, port 

and environmental safety, VTS, SAR, and ATON elements in addition to basic 

requirements of 46 USC 6301. Objections by attorneys may sometimes require 

deliberation by the investigative body. When this occurs, the investigative body shall 

go off the record. The witnesses shall be reminded that the Board may recall them if 

needed. 

The presiding officer may enter exhibits into the record at any time. Not all evidence 

identified or received during the course of a preliminary investigation need be or 

should be received as evidence during formal proceedings. Instead, the presiding 

officer should carefully limit the evidence presented to those items deemed to be 

relevant and informative. When evidence is proposed by Parties in Interest, the 

presiding officer must note on the record their decision regarding the receiving of 

that evidence. The presiding officer may decline to enter a piece of evidence into the 

record when they do not find the evidence relevant or pertinent. When a piece of 

evidence is received from the Coast Guard, it will be marked for identification as 

discussed in Chapter B3, section F. Evidence received as an exhibit will be assigned a 

sequential exhibit number (1, 2, 3, etc.) for evidence obtained by the Coast Guard, 

and a sequential exhibit letter (A, B, C, etc.) for evidence obtained by third party 

sources. The recorder or IO shall maintain a complete listing of exhibits along with 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART A: ADMINISTRATION

CHAPTER 5: LEVELS OF EFFORT AND TYPES OF INVESTIGATION 

A5-26 

I.5.b. Examination by the Marine Board or Lead 

Investigating Officer 

I.5.c. Authentication 

I.5.d. Marking of Third Party Exhibits 

The marking of exhibits is an important part of the record and therefore must be 

understood. Evidence collected by the Coast Guard is collected and marked (for 

identification) using the processes in Chapter B3, Section F. Exhibits collected by 

third parties, however, have not been marked for the purposes of the Coast Guard 

investigation. 

Third party evidence which has not yet been entered as an exhibit should be marked 

for identification by means of a stamp, and should remain in the custody of the 

submitting party until received as an exhibit. 

When evidence is received as an exhibit, or identified and rejected, it immediately 

goes into the custody of the presiding officer and remains in custody until final 

disposition is made. If, at any time, the exhibit is removed from the custody of the 

presiding officer, a signed receipt shall be substituted therefore, inserted in the place 

reserved for that particular exhibit. Exhibits referred to in the record of proceedings 

shall be numbered or lettered by the reporter at the time of marking for 

identification, or marking for identification and receipt into evidence. They shall be 

marked as follows: 

descriptions of each exhibit for the record. 

In many cases, entry of a piece of physical or documentary evidence as an exhibit will 

not be necessary. The evidence may be examined by the Marine Board or LIO, who 

will identify the salient characteristics for the record. A still or electronic photograph 

can then be taken of that aspect, and entered as an exhibit. 

When documentary evidence is entered as an exhibit, it should be identified during 

witness testimony and authenticated by the witness, rather than relying upon 

“hearsay” identification such as authentication by an IO. Documentary evidence that 

has been authenticated should be captioned and signed by the identifying witness. 

The recorder must complete authentication of exhibits before exhibits are forwarded 

or surrendered to the presiding officer, counsel, or Parties in Interest. Physical 

exhibits, such as glassware, film, or metal, that cannot be legibly and permanently 

stamped or marked upon their surfaces, the recorder shall affix to each such exhibit 

an adhesive tape surface that is large enough to receive proper authentication and 

identification. On exhibits consisting of bolts, nuts, revolvers, or knives, the recorder 

shall place the exhibit stamp on a tag and affix the tag to the exhibit, preferably by 

wire. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART A: ADMINISTRATION

CHAPTER 5: LEVELS OF EFFORT AND TYPES OF INVESTIGATION 

A5-27 

• A single series of consecutive numbers for the U. S. Coast Guard; and 

• A single series of consecutive capital letters for third parties 

I.6.

RELATIONSHIP TO 

LAW ENFORCEMENT 

ACTIVITIES

I.6.a. General 

I.6.b. Criminal Acts 

I.6.c. Civil/Administrative Penalties and Suspension 

and Revocation (S&R) Proceedings 

A single series of numbers or letters shall be used for the entire proceedings, 

regardless of the number, duration, or places of the proceedings. If exhibits in a 

particular hearing are, by direction of the presiding officer, made a part of the record 

in another proceeding, such exhibits shall be marked, stamped, recorded, and 

indexed, in regular sequence among the exhibits of the record into which they are 

incorporated, without damage to the original markings. A single series of numbers or 

letters shall be used for all exhibits whether marked for identification, introduced 

without previous marking for identification, or marked for identification and later 

introduced and received. The transcript shall reflect the offering of exhibits to be 

marked for identification and the receipt of exhibits in evidence in the record. The 

exhibit referred to in the transcript shall be stamped by the recorder on the face of 

the exhibit in the lower right-hand corner, if possible; otherwise, it shall be stamped 

where there is available space on the face of the exhibit. If there is no space on the 

face of the exhibit, the stamp will be placed on the back of the exhibit. Each page of 

the exhibit shall be marked. 

As described in Chapter A3 of this volume, investigations are neither administrative 

nor criminal. They are fact-finding activities directed toward determining the truth 

surrounding the circumstances or causal factors involved in the incident. For this 

reason, all investigations must be conducted in such fashion as to preserve the 

evidence and analysis for use in whatever enforcement proceedings are deemed 

necessary and appropriate. This procedural protection applies to the conduct of 

formal investigations both during formal proceedings and the supporting preliminary 

investigation. In general, because of the public nature of formal investigations, such 

investigations shall be suspended when an investigation solely to support criminal 

prosecution is appropriate, and should not be reconvened without approval of the 

Department of Justice until such time that criminal enforcement proceedings are 

complete. 

When a formal investigation detects evidence of a criminal act, that evidence shall be 

immediately forwarded to the Coast Guard Investigative Service via the cognizant 

District Commander in accordance with Part C: Enforcement, Section C.1. of this 

Manual. The Coast Guard Investigative Service, in consultation with the appropriate 

servicing legal office, will determine appropriate notification of other agencies, 

including the DOJ, as necessary. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART A: ADMINISTRATION

CHAPTER 5: LEVELS OF EFFORT AND TYPES OF INVESTIGATION 

A5-28 

I.6.d. Disposition of Evidence for Use in Law 

Enforcement 

I.7.

COMMENDATIONS

Recommendations by a Marine Board or LIO for official commendations in 

recognition of heroic, distinguished, or meritorious acts should be made the subject 

of a separate report and should not be included in a Report of Investigation (ROI). 

Such commendations include, but are not limited to: 

• Gold or Silver Lifesaving Medals 

• Maritime Administration (MARAD) Awards 

• Merchant Marine Distinguished Service Medal 

• Merchant Marine Meritorious Service Medal 

• Letter of Commendation or Appreciation to a Merchant Mariner (District 

Commander) 

• Public Service Awards 

I.8. ADJOURNING 

THE PROCEEDINGS

I.9. RECONVENING 

PROCEEDINGS

The investigative body should recommend such civil penalty, administrative penalty, 

and/or suspension and revocation action as is appropriate to the Cognizant OCMI 

and/or District Commander. The OCMI and District Commander retain authority 

and responsibility for the conduct of these enforcement actions. (See Part C of this 

volume.) 

The preservation of evidence for potential use in criminal, civil and/or administrative 

enforcement proceedings is a procedural requirement of all investigations. Formal 

investigations shall maintain an evidence locker in accordance with Chapter B3 of this 

volume such that evidence considered and/or received is available for use in 

enforcement proceedings. Convenience copies of such evidence (where possible) 

should be made and retained for the use of the formal investigation. 

• Other commendations issued by the Department of Homeland Security, 

Department of Transportation, or Department of State 

When proceedings must break for any reason (including multi-day hearings), the 

presiding officer shall adjourn the proceedings. The word close refers only to the end 

of hearings, after which time no further evidence or testimony will be received. 

Should the presiding officer mistakenly remark that the hearing is "closed," the word 

"adjourned" should be substituted in the record. When adjourning, the presiding 

officer should state on the record, “These proceedings are hereby adjourned until 

[date/time], when they will reconvene at [location].” 

When the proceedings reconvene after being adjourned, the presiding officer shall 

call the proceedings to order on the record: “The proceedings will come to order. 

Present are [list Marine Board members present and Parties in Interest present].” 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART A: ADMINISTRATION

CHAPTER 5: LEVELS OF EFFORT AND TYPES OF INVESTIGATION 

A5-29 

J.1. RECORDING 

OF SPEECH

J.2. REPORTER'S 

CERTIFICATE

J.3.

TRANSCRIPTION OF 

RECORDINGS

J.4. FORM OF THE 

TRANSCRIPTS

J.5. CONTENTS OF 

THE TRANSCRIPT

An Official Transcript of Proceedings will consist of the following items in the order 

given: 

• Cover Sheet, numbered page i; 

• Index of Witnesses, numbered page ii, iii, etc.; 

• Index of Exhibits, numbered page viii, etc.; 

• Appearance page, numbered 1, 1a, 1b, etc.; 

• Record, numbered page 2, 3, etc.; 

• Reporter's Certificate, last numbered page(s); 

• Motions or briefs (if any) filed with the presiding officer, proposed findings 

of fact and conclusions, and any other pertinent correspondence; 

• Rulings on motions; and 

J.6. APPEARANCE 

PAGE

J. DOCUMENTING THE PROCEEDINGS

Everything spoken during the proceedings must be recorded, unless the presiding 

officer directs otherwise during the course of the proceedings. If the presiding 

officer says, "It will be stricken," or words to that effect, those words and the 

direction to strike them shall remain in the record. Only if the presiding officer 

directs those words or phrases to be expunged shall they be left out of the transcript. 

If any other party says, "Off the record," the reporter shall be guided by the 

instructions of the presiding officer only. 

The reporter's certificate shall be executed by the reporter and shall be an exhibit to 

the investigation. When a transcript is prepared, the reporter’s certificate should be 

attached to the transcript of proceeding as the final numbered page. 

Transcripts of the proceedings (or portions thereof) should be made only upon the 

direction of the presiding officer, OCMI, District Commander, or CG-545. 

The record shall be typewritten in standard legal stenographic format. Generally, 

each page should be numbered in the lower right hand corner. Only one side of the 

paper should be used, leaving a margin of 1 inch on the left, 1⁄2 inch on the right, and 

1 inch at the top and bottom of each page. 

• Exhibits (original exhibits attached to original appeal record; copies of 

exhibits attached to copies of appeal record).

The appearance page immediately follows the Index of Witnesses and the Index of 

Exhibits and shall contain the title of the case; the docket number; the case number; 

the place, date, and time of the proceedings; the presiding officer; and all 

appearances. It shall be numbered page 1, 1a, etc. [NOTE: An appearance page 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART A: ADMINISTRATION

CHAPTER 5: LEVELS OF EFFORT AND TYPES OF INVESTIGATION 

A5-30 

J.7. COVER 

SHEETS AND 

BINDINGS

J.8. CORRECTIONS 

TO RECORDS,

DEPOSITIONS, AND 

SWORN STATEMENTS

J.9. DEPOSITIONS 

AND 

INTERROGATORIES

These may be oral or written, or a combination of both. Depositions are statements 

made by a witness, and interrogatories are questions asked of a witness unable to 

appear at a session of the proceedings, by parties to the proceedings. They are 

transcribed the same way as that of the proceedings of which they are a result, with 

the following exceptions: 

• The Cover Sheet denotes that it is a deposition of a particular witness in lieu 

of a hearing or investigation. 

must be made for each day of the proceedings.]

A cover sheet shall be prefixed to each volume of the record. The cover sheet should 

identify the case; the place, date, and time of the proceedings; the number of pages 

(per volume); and the Coast Guard district and port where the proceedings were held. 

The cover sheet should also be marked, near the lower margin, "Vol. 1 of 12," etc. 

See Figure A5-1 for an example cover sheet. At the end of each volume of the 

record, following all appended documents, a heavy blank sheet shall be added to 

protect the record. All transcribed pages of the record must be securely bound 

together on the left margin (book style). When the record is long, it shall be bound in 

volumes, each not exceeding 250 pages and terminating at the conclusion of an 

individual witness' testimony. Small transcripts may be bound with staples and 

masking tape to cover the staples. Exhibits should be placed in file-size envelopes 

and marked by exhibit number and title or a short description of the exhibit.

The hearing record is to be transcribed verbatim. Should an error of a substantive 

nature be noted in the record, the presiding officer shall make the necessary 

correction(s) to the record. This is done only if, after checking the record, it is in fact 

found to be in error. Grammatical errors, colloquialisms, or slang expressions used 

by a witness should be transcribed exactly as stated by the witness. Phonetic spellings 

of uncommon words may be used. A witness who desires to make corrections to a 

deposition, written interrogatory, or sworn statement shall draw a line through the 

information to be corrected with a pen, so as not to make it illegible. The witness 

then shall legibly print the new information above the lined-out information, initialing 

each correction and the bottom of each page in the right-hand corner, to indicate that 

he or she has read each page. Upon completion of the transcription of an official 

record, deposition, written interrogatory, or sworn statement, it is sometimes noted 

that a page number is repeated or inadvertently omitted. Should a page number be 

repeated, the second page of the same number should have the letter "a" placed after 

the page number. If a page number is omitted, a notation to that effect should be 

placed at the bottom of the previously numbered page close to the page number (e.g., 

"(Page 126 omitted.)"). Interjections in the record such as "hum," "aha," "ah," 

"ahem," or "phew," are to be avoided in the transcription of the record as they 

needlessly clutter the record. However, the following interjections are included in the 

record as they indicate a definite answer: uh-huh" (meaning yes); "uh-uh" (meaning 

no); and "huh?" (meaning the question or answer was not heard or understood).
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART A: ADMINISTRATION

CHAPTER 5: LEVELS OF EFFORT AND TYPES OF INVESTIGATION 

A5-31 

• The Index contains only the page numbers of the testimony and attachments 

thereto (if any), and the exhibits that are made a part of the testimony (if any). 

• The Appearance Page denotes that it is a deposition and the name of the 

witness(es) to be deposed. 

• The depositions and interrogatories do not have direct and crossexamination, but merely a notation of whom the examination is made by. 

• Parenthetical remarks are made when the witness is not available to sign a 

deposition, written interrogatory, or sworn statement. Should the witness be

sailing or otherwise unavailable for signature, the instrument can be 

completed and forwarded to the appropriate requesting officer; however, 

signatures should be obtained if possible. A parenthetical notation beginning 

at the center of the page to the effect that the reading and signing of the 

instrument was waived, should be added at the end of the deposition. 

• The reporter's certificate is altered to show the name of the witness being 

deposed. 

• In taking depositions or written interrogatories, the presiding officer is 

required to sign a certificate. 

J.10. SWORN 

STATEMENTS

J.11.

PARENTHETICAL 

ENTRIES

Parenthetical phrases for the marking of exhibits and excusing of witnesses shall start 

in the center of the page and continue to the right margin. [NOTE: Complete

English sentences are used in parenthetical remarks; as in "(A recess was taken.)," 

"(There was discussion off the record.)," and "(The witness was excused)."] There is 

a group of parenthetical remarks that rarely, if ever, occur in transcripts. It consists 

of a word or phrase immediately following a transcribed sentence but within a 

paragraph. The most frequent words in this group are "(Laughter)" and 

"(Applause)." The first letter is capitalized so that the parenthetical remark will be set 

off more obviously from the main body of the sentence. The participants in

proceedings routinely hand each other documents without the need for parenthetical 

remarks. Either they say on the record that they are handing something to another, or 

the handing is of no concern to the reader. However, there are two occasions when a 

parenthetical remark is necessary when something is handed from one person to the 

other. 

• A request or a direction is made for the handing of a paper, and the paper is 

• In the event the deposition is a combination of both written questions and 

oral questions, both formats should be used.

Sworn statements have no Cover Sheet, Appearance, or Contents page, unless there 

are attorneys present, in which case an Appearance page is necessary. A reporter's or 

presiding officer's certificate is not required. Only the notation that the statement 

was sworn to and subscribed before the officer who affixes his or her signature to the 

last page of the statement is necessary.
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART A: ADMINISTRATION

CHAPTER 5: LEVELS OF EFFORT AND TYPES OF INVESTIGATION 

A5-32 

then handed silently; or 

• The witness answers a question, the questioning attorney hands the witness a 

paper without saying that the attorney is doing so, and then the witness 

changes his or her answer. Without a parenthetical remark, the reader would 

have no clue as to the reason for the change in the witness' answer. A 

question may require a witness, in the course of testimony, to point to a spot

on a photograph or chart, indicate a certain distance, or demonstrate a certain 

action. If the witness does so without speaking, the following parentheticals 

should be used: 

 A "(The witness indicated.)" 

 A "(The witness demonstrated.)" 

 A "(The witness marked the photograph.)" 

J.12. BREAKS IN 

TESTIMONY

When the examination of a witness is interrupted by a recess during the day, for a 

noon lunch break, or at the end of the day, the following format is used: 

"Thereupon, JOHN JACKSON resumed the stand and testified further as follows: 

J.13. USE OF 

INTERPRETERS

When an interpreter's services are used, the following parenthetical phrase is used: 

"(A.B. GARCIA was duly sworn to interpret English into Spanish, and Spanish into 

English to the best of his ability.)" 

These parenthetical remarks note only that the witness indicated, demonstrated, or 

marked the photograph. The reporter should never presume in a parenthetical 

remark to specify any height or distance a witness may have indicated, the manner in 

which a witness may have demonstrated, or the part of an exhibit that may have been 

marked. If a witness says, "It hurt me here," no parenthetical remark should be 

added. An attorney or the presiding officer will sometimes add the comment, 

"Indicating the left shoulder," or "Indicating the head." Even if no one makes a 

comment on the record to clarify a vague answer, the reporter should not make 

presumptions. An error on the reporter's part may be an influence on one of the 

parties concerned, with no way of correcting the error later. There is no need for the 

parenthetical remark "(Interrupting)" in a reporter's transcript. When one speaker is 

interrupted by another in mid-sentence, a dash shall be put at the end of the 

interrupted remark. Also, there is no need for the parenthetical remark 

"(Continuing)" in the reporter's transcript. [NOTE: A dash is also used to note a 

change of thought in mid-sentence of the person speaking.] Likewise, there is no 

need for the parenthetical remark "(Reading)" in a transcript. The quotation marks 

that surround a direct quote make it absolutely clear that something is being read, and 

the marks are far less cumbersome than "(Reading). " 

DIRECT EXAMINATION (Continued). " 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART A: ADMINISTRATION

CHAPTER 5: LEVELS OF EFFORT AND TYPES OF INVESTIGATION 

A5-33 

"Thereupon, JOSE LOPEZ REYES, having been called as a witness by the U.S. 

Coast Guard and having first been duly sworn, was examined and testified through 

the interpreter as follows:" 

K.1.

INTRODUCTION

K.2. CLOSING 

STATEMENT

K.3. DRAFTING 

THE REPORT

K.4. USE OF 

MISLE 

K.5. APPROVAL OF 

THE REPORT

K.6. FINAL 

DISPOSITION OF 

RECORDS AND 

EXHIBITS

K.6.a. Final Disposition of Exhibits 

A witness may testify through an interpreter, but occasionally may give an answer in 

English. An interpreter may be present in case the witness is unable to speak

English. The witness may testify for the most part in English, but occasionally may 

give an answer through the interpreter. 

K. CLOSING THE PROCEEDINGS

The closing of formal proceedings does not conclude the investigation; instead it 

marks only the end of the public participation in the investigation. Contact with 

Parties in Interest can and should continue after the formal proceedings have been 

closed. 

The presiding officer should deliver a summary closing statement detailing the course 

of the formal proceedings. Such closing statement should not include conclusions of 

fact or causes, and must avoid the appearance of blame apportionment. In general, 

the closing statement should mirror the opening statement. 

The recorder or LIO shall draft an ROI in accordance with Chapter A6 of this 

volume. The ROI shall contain the information developed using the investigative 

processes described in Part B of this volume. The printed ROI and associated 

MISLE data shall serve as the public record of the investigation. 

The ROI shall be developed using MISLE. Accordingly, the recorder or LIO must 

enter all data regarding the incident required by MISLE, and the entire record of the 

investigation should be held within MISLE. No separate report should be generated. 

The ROI must be approved by the convening authority. For a Marine Board, the 

case is forwarded by the Chair to CG-545 for review and approval. For District and 

Unit Formal Investigations, the LIO forwards the case to the OCMI or District 

Commander for review and approval. When a case contains safety 

recommendations, final approval of the case rests with the highest entity in the chain 

of command to which the recommendations are addressed. 

Documentary evidence produced in accordance with 46 CFR 4.05-15(a) or 4.09-5 

should be reproduced or read into the record and then returned to the owner. For 

protection at a later date, the recorder should note (off the record) when, where, and 

to whom evidentiary material is returned. Real evidence such as items of equipment, 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART A: ADMINISTRATION

CHAPTER 5: LEVELS OF EFFORT AND TYPES OF INVESTIGATION 

A5-34 

K.6.b. Transmittal Of Exhibits 

L.1.

INTRODUCTION

L.2. PRELIMINARY 

INVESTIGATION

debris, life preservers, etc., may be received or exhibited in evidence if relevant to an 

issue in the investigation. Body wounds or scars may also be displayed. Real

evidence should be clearly and accurately described in the testimony. Where possible, 

real evidence should be reduced to photographs, lab reports, etc., and the original 

pieces returned to their owners. The resulting documents should then be marked as 

exhibits and made part of the record. Photographs of material conditions constitute 

a highly valuable form of evidence, provided they are not susceptible to 

misinterpretation. Photographs should be identified as to what they portray, with the 

date, place, and the photographer's name. If the witness is asked to draw a sketch, it 

should be drawn off the record. This has been found beneficial because a witness, in 

making a sketch, will often mumble to himself or say aloud things that are out of 

context and which are nonsensical in the record. When the witness has finished, the 

chairperson shall return to the record, ask the witness to explain what was drawn, and 

have the witness sign and date the sketch. [NOTE: Whenever possible, one color 

should be used to draw or mark exhibits. If various colors are used, adequate 

differentiation between colors (e.g., "red is dotted line,” "green is dashed line"), must 

be provided so that later black and white reproduction of the document will be 

understandable.] It is imperative that the witnesses clearly and concisely refer to the 

exhibit in an exact manner in order to produce a meaningful record. For example, if 

a compartment in an exhibit is marked "Compartment A," the witness should refer to 

it as such, rather than "this" or "that" compartment. Also blow-ups of exhibits 

should be used to facilitate convenient reading and access by all parties. 

Unless otherwise directed, exhibits shall be transmitted at the same time as the record 

of proceedings, whether in the same volume or in separate volumes. If any exhibits 

are not attached to the record (i.e., too large or classified) a memorandum shall be 

inserted in the appropriate place, giving the full identification data of the exhibit and 

stating that it is being forwarded under separate cover. 

L. NATIONAL TRANSPORTATION SAFETY BOARD (NTSB) 

The purposes and conduct of marine investigations by the NTSB and Coast Guard 

are compatible and complementary. Accordingly, it is acceptable and desired that 

formal investigations and NTSB investigations cooperate and even merge. At times, 

NTSB representatives may be named to and participate in formal Coast Guard 

investigations, or Coast Guard representatives may be named as party to, and 

participate in, formal NTSB proceedings. This section outlines the general 

relationship between the agencies and the rules under which each operates.

Upon receipt of a notification, the Coast Guard should initiate an investigation based 

upon the reported severity of the incident. When a formal investigation is called for, 

on-scene IOs should pursue an active preliminary investigation under the informal 

rules in support of the formal investigation. This is also true in the case of casualties 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART A: ADMINISTRATION

CHAPTER 5: LEVELS OF EFFORT AND TYPES OF INVESTIGATION 

A5-35 

L.3. NOTIFYING 

THE NTSB 

In accordance with 46 CFR 4.40-10, the OCMI must determine and inform CG-545 

in the most efficient means available if a casualty: 

• Is a major marine casualty; 

• Involves a public and a nonpublic vessel and at least one fatality or $75,000 in 

property damage; 

• Involves a Coast Guard and a nonpublic vessel and at least one fatality or 

$75,000 in property damage; or 

• Is a major marine casualty that involves significant safety issues (multiple 

deaths, serious hazards, etc.) relating to Coast Guard safety functions (search 

and rescue (SAR), aids to navigation (ATON), vessel traffic systems (VTS), 

etc.). 

L.4. THE COAST 

GUARD / NTSB

RELATIONSHIP

L.4.a. NTSB-led Investigations 

In accordance with the CG/NTSB MOU and 46 CFR 4.40-15(b), the NTSB shall 

conduct the investigation of certain major marine and public/nonpublic vessel 

casualties. When NTSB is leading the investigation, Parties in Interest shall not be 

designated by the Coast Guard. Although these investigations are conducted by the 

NTSB in accordance with their procedures, the Coast Guard will participate fully as a 

party. The OCMI should maintain daily contact with CG-545 during the 

investigation. Additionally, when the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) 

is the lead investigating agency for an incident and the Coast Guard is not conducting 

its own formal investigation, the cognizant unit shall, at a minimum, complete an 

Incident Investigation Activity at the Data Collection level for the incident 

L.4.b. Coast Guard-led Investigations 

later to be investigated by the NTSB. In accordance with 46 CFR 4.40-10, the Coast 

Guard’s preliminary investigation should first determine whether the accident meets 

the criteria for NTSB notification. The OCMI shall then continue to direct on-scene 

investigation efforts until such time as the investigation transitions to NTSB or other 

formal control. 

Following notification from the OCMI, CG-545 will notify NTSB. Units shall 

not contact NTSB directly. 

When requested by NTSB in accordance with 46 CFR 4.40-25, the Coast Guard will 

conduct the investigation of major marine casualties and certain public/nonpublic 

vessel casualties for the NTSB. In some instances, the NTSB will designate a 

representative to participate in every phase of the investigation, including on-site 

investigation, conducted under the provisions of 46 CFR 4.40-25. Consistent with 

the Coast Guard's responsibility to direct the course of the investigation, the NTSB 

representative may make recommendations about the scope of the investigation, call 

and examine witnesses, and submit or request additional evidence. A copy of the 

record (i.e., the testimony, exhibits, statements, photographs, etc.), of each 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART A: ADMINISTRATION

CHAPTER 5: LEVELS OF EFFORT AND TYPES OF INVESTIGATION 

A5-36 

L.4.c. On-Scene Coast Guard Activities 

L.5.

PARTICIPATING IN 

NTSB PROCEEDINGS

L.5.a. Introduction 

L.5.b. Designated Parties 

investigation in which the NTSB participates, including those conducted by Marine 

Boards of Investigation, shall be transmitted directly to the NTSB throughout the 

course of the investigation. 

Upon the occurrence of a major marine or a public/nonpublic vessel casualty that 

meets the criteria of 46 CFR 4.40-15(b), the appropriate Coast Guard commands 

shall continue routine on-scene activities (SAR, pollution response and emergency 

services, succor survivors, manage traffic in the affected waterway, or accommodate 

salvage activities). The OCMI/Captain of the Port (COTP) should take reasonable 

measures to secure the scene from sightseers and looters until the NTSB or Coast 

Guard marine investigators have had an opportunity to view the scene and document 

the evidence.

After the NTSB investigator in charge (IIC) has had an opportunity to determine the 

central issues of the accident, the various parties participating in the investigation may 

be assigned to groups, each responsible for gathering certain facts. The number of 

NTSB investigators assigned and the number of investigative groups formed 

generally will depend upon the severity of the casualty. In many cases, there will be 

only one "group." The NTSB prefers that individuals possessing various skills, such 

as experienced investigators or technicians, be assigned to assist parties within the 

assigned groups. The Coast Guard will always be designated as a party and, as such, 

will provide personnel to participate in investigative groups. The OCMI will 

normally appoint at least one IO to participate in witness interviews. When several 

groups are formed to investigate a severe casualty, the Commandant or District 

Commander will appoint an individual to serve as Coast Guard liaison with the 

NTSB team. Additional personnel may be designated to participate in the 

investigative groups. Such personnel should have some training and experience in 

the subject matter to be investigated by the group. Examples of groups that may be

proposed include weather, witnesses, structures, recorded communications, course 

recorder, operations, engineering, and human factors. NTSB procedures require that 

each group shall be led by an NTSB investigator. Under the direction of the group 

chairperson, each group will perform the task(s) assigned to it. 

Under the NTSB rules, those persons, agencies, companies, and associations whose 

participation in the hearing is deemed necessary in the public interest and whose 

special knowledge will contribute to the development of pertinent evidence are 

designated parties. A party to an NTSB investigation is normally a marine 

organization or agency that can aid in developing the facts of the casualty. 

Individuals normally are not designated as parties. A party under NTSB procedures is 

afforded rights similar to a party in interest. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART A: ADMINISTRATION

CHAPTER 5: LEVELS OF EFFORT AND TYPES OF INVESTIGATION 

A5-37 

L.5.c. NTSB Hearings 

L.5.d. Testimony By Coast Guard Personnel 

L.5.e. Proposed Findings, Conclusions, And 

Recommendations 

L.5.f. Effects Upon Coast Guard Actions 

It is likely that the NTSB will hold a formal hearing or deposition soon after the onscene investigation (in approximately 2 to 6 weeks). It is at this time that verbatim 

testimony and exhibits are formally entered into evidence. As a party to the 

investigation, the Coast Guard will provide a spokesperson; normally, this shall be the 

senior officer participating in the on-scene investigation. The NTSB interprets the 

word spokesperson to mean "the only person allowed to talk on behalf of the party at 

the hearing." The Coast Guard spokesperson should be prepared to ask questions of 

witnesses and otherwise participate and fully represent the Coast Guard's interest in 

the hearing. The policy of the NTSB is to allow only one spokesperson for the 

complete formal hearing. Certain exceptions have been permitted, such as where the 

subject matter concerned two program areas. One officer was allowed to examine 

witnesses of concern to his program while the spokesperson questioned the other 

witnesses. If exceptions are deemed necessary, approval should be obtained from the 

IIC. The NTSB rules in 49 CFR 845.13 require that the spokesperson be a suitably 

qualified technical employee who does not occupy a legal position. In general, the 

spokesperson will not be an attorney. 

Since the NTSB does not exclude witnesses from the hearing during the testimony of 

other witnesses, the Coast Guard spokesperson should take the opportunity to 

familiarize Coast Guard witnesses with both the hearing procedure and the testimony 

of other witnesses. Coast Guard personnel called as witnesses shall be provided legal 

counsel. 

At the conclusion of the NTSB proceedings, each party has the opportunity to 

submit proposed findings of fact, conclusions, and recommendations. The Coast 

Guard spokesperson shall prepare and submit proposed findings of fact, conclusions, 

and recommendations setting forth the Coast Guard's positions on the casualty, and 

the evidence developed by the investigation. A copy of all proposed findings of fact, 

conclusions, and recommendations shall be submitted to CG-545 and to the District 

Commander in whose district the investigation is held.

Should information gathered during the preliminary or NTSB investigation indicate 

that civil or criminal penalty proceedings, S&R proceedings under 46 USC Chapter 

77, or court-martial proceedings under the Uniform Code of Military Justice are 

warranted, an appropriate investigation must proceed independently of NTSB 

activities. Such action shall not be held in abeyance pending the NTSB report. Coast 

Guard personnel participating in the NTSB investigation shall not be assigned to 

conduct UCMJ investigations. However, evidence developed during the course of an 

NTSB investigation may be used to document a report of violation or for discovery 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART A: ADMINISTRATION

CHAPTER 5: LEVELS OF EFFORT AND TYPES OF INVESTIGATION 

A5-38 

L.6. ACTION ON 

NTSB REPORTS

purposes in S&R proceedings. 

For those casualties investigated by NTSB, a copy of the NTSB report of 

investigation will be reviewed by CG-545 to determine what action, if any, shall be 

taken with respect to the NTSB's safety recommendations. This report will be 

retained by CG-545. The Coast Guard spokesperson involved in NTSB-led 

investigations shall complete the MISLE data entry requirements for the casualty. 

The report and the original of Coast Guard required forms such as the Barge 

Addendum, CG-2692A should be forwarded to CG-545 via the cognizant OCMI and 

District Commander. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART A: ADMINISTRATION

CHAPTER 5: LEVELS OF EFFORT AND TYPES OF INVESTIGATION 

A5-39 

FIGURE A5-1: COVER SHEET FOR TRANSCRIPTS OF FORMAL PROCEEDINGS 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

UNITED STATES COAST GUARD 

In the Matter of: 

THE MARINE BOARD OF INVESTIGATION 

INTO THE COLLISION OF THE S/S 

FROSTA AND THE M/V GEORGE PRINCE 

ON 20 JANUARY 1988 AT MILE 120. 8, 

LOWER MISSISSIPPI RIVER 

. . . . Pursuant to Notice, the above-entitled investigation commenced at 0900,c. s. t. on Saturday, 23 

January 1988, at the U. S. Coast Guard Marine Inspection Office, 23rd Floor, 1440 Canal Street, 

New Orleans, Louisiana, BEFORE: 

REAR ADMIRAL WILLIAM P. DAVIS, USCG, Chair; 

CAPTAIN JAMES M. DUKE, USCG; 

CAPTAIN RONALD D. THOMAS, USCG,

Members, 

and 

COMMANDER PETER C. LAWRENCE, USCG, Member and Recorder. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART A: ADMINISTRATION

CHAPTER 5: LEVELS OF EFFORT AND TYPES OF INVESTIGATION 

A5-40 

FIGURE A5-2: SAMPLE EXHIBIT WORKSHEET 

In the Matter of: 

THE MARINE BOARD OF INVESTIGATION 

INTO THE COLLISION OF THE S/S 

FROSTA AND THE M/V GEORGE PRINCE 

ON 20 JANUARY 1988 AT MILE 120. 8, 

LOWER MISSISSIPPI RIVER 

EXHIBITS: 

Exhibits submitted by the Coast Guard (Description and Number of Pages) 

(1) 

(2) 

(3) 

(4) 

(5) 

(6) 

Exhibits submitted by other parties (Description, Source, Number of Pages) 

(A) 

(B) 

(C) 

(D) 

(E) 

(F) 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART A: ADMINISTRATION

CHAPTER 5: LEVELS OF EFFORT AND TYPES OF INVESTIGATION 

A5-41 

FIGURE A5-3: SAMPLE REPORTER'S CERTIFICATE 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA;

UNITED STATES COAST GUARD 

In the Matter of: 

THE MARINE BOARD OF INVESTIGATION INTO THE COLLISION OF THE S/S FROSTA 

AND THE M/V GEORGE PRINCE ON 20 JANUARY 1988 AT MILE 120. 8, LOWER MISSISSIPPI 

RIVER 

I, PEGGY A TRAYLOR, an officially designated and qualified (Reporter, Shorthand Reporter, 

Reporting Stenographer or Court Reporter, as appropriate) of the United States Coast Guard, hereby 

certify that the foregoing proceedings were taken by me and transcribed by me, and is a true record of 

the testimony of all witnesses, and of the proceedings herein contained. I further certify that there is no 

interest attached, either financially or by virtue of relationship with any party hereto, on my part. 

PEGGY A. TRAYLOR 

Shorthand Reporter 

U. S. Coast Guard 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART A: ADMINISTRATION

CHAPTER 5: LEVELS OF EFFORT AND TYPES OF INVESTIGATION 

A5-42 

FIGURE A5-4: SAMPLE DEPOSITION COVER SHEET 

OFFICIAL TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS

DEPOSITION OF JOHN JACKSON 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

UNITED STATES COAST GUARD 

In the Matter of: 

THE MARINE BOARD OF INVESTIGATION INTO THE COLLISION OF THE S/S FROSTA AND 

THE M/V GEORGE PRINCE ON 20 JANUARY 1988 AT MILE 120. 8, LOWER MISSISSIPPI 

RIVER 

Place: Houston, Texas 

Date: 2 February 1988 

CONTENTS Page

Testimony, John Jackson 2 

Reporter's Certificate 6 

Certificate of Officer Taking Deposition 7 

Order for Taking Deposition 

Application for Taking of Deposition

Direct Interrogatories 

Cross Interrogatories (if any) 

Subpoena (es) (if any used) 

EXHIBITS

U.S. COAST GUARD (Description ) 

(if any) 

THIRD PARTY (Description, Source) 

(if any) 

APPEARANCES: 

On behalf of the United States Coast Guard: 

LT I. KNOWELL, USCG (if represented) 

On behalf of the Parties in Interest: 

I. COUNSELWELL, Esq. (if represented) 

JOHN SMITH, Party in Interest (if present) 

JOHN JACKSON, Deponent 

FIGURE A5-5: SAMPLE WRITTEN DEPOSITION 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART A: ADMINISTRATION

CHAPTER 5: LEVELS OF EFFORT AND TYPES OF INVESTIGATION 

A5-43 

PROCEEDINGS

CHAIR: Good morning, gentlemen. The matter of taking the deposition as duly ordered in the hearing 

held in New York, involving the matter of the sinking of the M/V NOWHERE on the Houston Ship 

Canal on October 15, 1972, is now open. Let the record show that the date is 2 February 1988, and the 

time is now 1000 hours or 10:00 a. m. The reporter has been previously sworn and the evidence is being 

recorded by means of stenotype equipment. 

CHAIR: Are you the gentleman that received the subpoena today for this deposition?

MR. JACKSON: Yes, sir. 

CHAIR: Would you kindly stand and raise your right hand. 

Thereupon, JOHN JACKSON having been called as a witness by the U. S. Coast Guard and having first 

been duly sworn, was examined and testified as follows; 

CHAIR: The court reporter should append a copy of the subpoena to the record showing his signature as 

having been served this date in Houston, Texas, to Mr. Jackson. Mr. Jackson, do you have a form of 

identification with you today?

MR.JACKSON: Yes, sir. 

CHAIR: May I see it, please, so that I may read it into the record. 

Let the record show that Mr. Jackson has produced a U.S. Merchant Mariner's Document No. Z1201156, issued to John Jackson, giving his date of birth as 1942 in Ohio, USA. His address at the time 

of issue was 20 Parker Street, Charleston, Massachusetts. It indicates his height as 5'11"; weight, 165 

pounds; fair complexion; brown eyes; and brown hair. It indicates his Social Security No. 292- 35-

3622, and that it was issued by the U.S. Coast Guard at the port of Boston, Massachusetts on June 22, 

1968. It's endorsed for any unlicensed rating in the engine department, lifeboatman and ordinary 

seaman. 

I will return your document to you at this time. Mr. Jackson, we have questions relating to the incident 

from the Marine Board and from the attorney representing a party in interest, Mr. Smith. Please answer 

the questions fully and completely and to the point. If you do not understand the question, I will reread 

the question upon request. 

DIRECT INTERROGATORIES TO BE PROPOUNDED ON BEHALF OF THE U.S. COAST 

GUARD BY THE CHAIR: 

1. For the record, please state your full name and address. 

A John Jackson. 

2. ----- 

A ----- 

3. ----- 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART A: ADMINISTRATION

CHAPTER 5: LEVELS OF EFFORT AND TYPES OF INVESTIGATION 

A5-44 

A ----- 

4. ----- 

A Please repeat that question again. 

4. ----- 

A ----- 

5. ----- 

A ----- 

CHAIR: That's the end of the direct interrogatories by the Coast Guard. Now, I'm going to ask you the 

question or cross interrogatories proposed by the party in interest's counsel. 

CROSS INTERROGATORIES PROPOUNDED ON BEHALF OF THE PARTY IN INTEREST: 

1. ----- 

A ----- 

2. ----- 

A ----- 

CHAIR: Mr. Jackson, that concludes the questions proposed by both sides in this matter. The 

regulations provide that a formal transcript will be prepared of all the testimony you have just presented. 

Further, you have the right to review and examine that evidence as formally prepared and make any 

change as to form or substance, accompanying that change with pertinent reasons therefore. Now, do 

you wish to stand by and examine the prepared transcript of the record, or do you wish to have the 

record stand as you have testified and waive your right of signature? 

MR. JACKSON: I will waive my right to sign and let the record stand as I have testified. 

CHAIR: Very well. Do you have anything else that you think you would like to add that you think is 

important or relevant to this testimony?

MR. JACKSON: No, I don't. 

CHAIR: All right. The subpoena as served upon you has been duly spent in this matter and the 

deposition is now closed. You are excused as a witness, Mr. Jackson. 

(The witness was excused.) 

(Whereupon, at 11:00 o'clock a. m. , the deposition was closed.) 

(Reading and signing of the deposition was waived by the witness.) 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART A: ADMINISTRATION

CHAPTER 5: LEVELS OF EFFORT AND TYPES OF INVESTIGATION 

A5-45 

FIGURE A5-6: SAMPLE REPORTER'S CERTIFICATE FOR DEPOSITION 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA;

UNITED STATES COAST GUARD 

In the Matter of: 

THE MARINE BOARD OF INVESTIGATION INTO THE COLLISION OF THE S/S FROSTA AND 

THE M/V GEORGE PRINCE ON 20 JANUARY 1988 AT MILE 120. 8, LOWER MISSISSIPPI 

RIVER 

I, PEGGY A. TRAYLOR, an officially designated and qualified (Reporter, Shorthand Reporter, 

Reporting Stenographer or Court Reporter, as appropriate) of the United States Coast Guard, hereby 

certify that the foregoing proceedings were taken by me and transcribed by me, and is a true record of 

the testimony of JOHN JACKSON, Deponent, and of the proceedings herein contained. I further certify 

that there is no interest attached, either financially or by virtue of relationship with any party hereto, on 

my part. 

PEGGY A. TRAYLOR 

Shorthand Reporter 

U.S. Coast Guard 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART A: ADMINISTRATION

CHAPTER 5: LEVELS OF EFFORT AND TYPES OF INVESTIGATION 

A5-46 

FIGURE A5-7 :SAMPLE OFFICER'S CERTIFICATE 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA;

UNITED STATES COAST GUARD 

In the Matter of: 

THE MARINE BOARD OF INVESTIGATION INTO THE COLLISION OF THE S/S FROSTA AND 

THE M/V GEORGE PRINCE ON 20 JANUARY 1988 AT MILE 120. 8, LOWER MISSISSIPPI 

RIVER 

I, I. KNOWELL, a commissioned officer in the U.S. Coast Guard, do hereby certify that, pursuant to 

notice of taking deposition, there came before me on the 2nd day of February, A.D., 1988, at 10:00 

o'clock a.m., at 7300 Wingate Street, Houston, Texas, the following named person, to wit, JOHN 

JACKSON, who was by me duly sworn to testify the whole truth and nothing but the truth of his 

knowledge touching and concerning the interrogatories and cross interrogatories (questions) propounded 

to him, and he was examined upon his oath, his examination being taken down stenographically by 

Peggy A. Traylor and transcribed by said individual (or, under her direction). I further certify that I 

have retained said deposition for the purpose of sealing and forwarding to the Chair of the Marine Board 

of Investigation presiding in the above-entitled matter, pursuant to his order. 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this day of 1988. 

I. KNOWELL, LT 

United States Coast Guard 
USCG Marine Safety Manual 

Volume V: Investigations and Enforcement

PART A: ADMINISTRATION

Chapter Six: 

Official Records and 

Reports of Investigation
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART A: ADMINISTRATION

CHAPTER 6: OFFICIAL RECORDS AND REPORTS OF INVESTIGATION 

A6-i 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

A. OFFICIAL RECORD OF THE INVESTIGATION ........... 1

A.1. OFFICIAL RECORD............................................................................................................................................................1

A.2. REPORT OF INVESTIGATION (ROI) ...................................................................................................................................1

A.3. INVESTIGATION ACTIVITY FILE........................................................................................................................................1

A.4. CORRESPONDENCE RECORD.............................................................................................................................................1

A.5. SUBSTITUTE ORIGINALS...................................................................................................................................................1

A.6. NOTES AND OTHER INTERNAL DOCUMENTS ....................................................................................................................1

B. ROIS AND ACTIVITY FILES ..................... 1

B.1. REQUIREMENT FOR MISLE NOTIFICATION ......................................................................................................................1

B.2. INCIDENT INVESTIGATION ACTIVITY PREPARATION AND REVIEW ...................................................................................2

B.2.a. Data Collection Activities and Informal Investigations............................................................................................2

B.2.b. Unit and District Formal Investigations...................................................................................................................2

B.2.c. Marine Boards of Investigation ................................................................................................................................2

B.3. CRITERION FOR REVIEW OF INCIDENT INVESTIGATION ACTIVITIES AND ROIS ................................................................2

B.4. REQUIREMENTS FOR ROIS................................................................................................................................................3

B.5. ENDORSEMENTS OF ROIS.................................................................................................................................................3

C. RETENTION OF INVESTIGATIVE RECORDS ............. 3

C.1. DISPOSITION OF INVESTIGATIVE RECORDS.......................................................................................................................3

C.2. RETENTION OF RECORDS OF HISTORICAL VALUE.............................................................................................................3

D. FORMAT AND TEMPLATE FOR REPORTS OF INVESTIGATION.. 3

D.1. GENERAL .........................................................................................................................................................................3

D.2. MANDATORY STRUCTURE................................................................................................................................................4

D.2.a. Required Structure ...................................................................................................................................................4

D.3. STYLE OF WRITING ..........................................................................................................................................................4

D.4. USE OF PICTURES, DIAGRAMS, AND TABLES....................................................................................................................4
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART A: ADMINISTRATION

CHAPTER 6: OFFICIAL RECORDS AND REPORTS OF INVESTIGATION 

A6-1 

A.1. OFFICIAL 

RECORD

A.2. REPORT OF 

INVESTIGATION 

(ROI) 

The Report of Investigation (ROI) includes the narrative document consisting of 

findings of fact, analysis, conclusions, recommendations, the CG-2692A as 

completed and corrected by the IO, and all endorsements by the Commanding 

Officer, Sector Commander, District Commander, and Commandant. The ROI does 

not include the evidence. ROIs are required in all formal investigations, but are 

optional in informal investigations and data collection activities. When no ROI has 

been created, the MISLE incident investigation activity serves as the ROI. 

A.3.

INVESTIGATION 

ACTIVITY FILE

A.4.

CORRESPONDENCE 

RECORD

The Correspondence Record means the sum of all relevant, official correspondence 

generated as a result of conducting the investigation. At a minimum, the IO should 

maintain the following in the correspondence record: 

• Letters generated by the Coast Guard relevant to the investigation while open; 

• Letters from parties in interest relevant to the investigation while open; 

• Letter from 3rd parties relevant to the investigation while open; and 

A.5. SUBSTITUTE 

ORIGINALS

A.6. NOTES AND 

OTHER INTERNAL 

DOCUMENTS

B.1. REQUIREMENT 

FOR MISLE

A. OFFICIAL RECORD OF THE INVESTIGATION

The Official Record of an investigation is the MISLE incident investigation activity, 

which includes the Report of Investigation (when required), and all evidence 

including testimony, statements, the precept (for formals), the CG-2692A form(s), 

attachments, any substitute originals and the correspondence record. 

__________________________________________________________________ 

The Incident Investigation Activity means the referential and incident-specific data 

contained by MISLE. The Incident Investigation Activity may contain the ROI, 

correspondence records, all evidence including testimony, statements, the CG-2692A 

form(s), attachments, any substitute originals or subset thereof. 

• All correspondence related to appeals. 

Substitute Original means a photograph or some other medium can be used as a 

replacement for a piece of physical evidence, where the original is no longer required. 

During the course of an investigation, an enormous amount of notes, reminders, 

internal memorandum, etc., not forming a substantive part of the record of the 

investigative proceedings can accrue. These notes and internal documents are not

part of the official record, and must be properly disposed of prior to final agency 

action. 

B. ROIS AND ACTIVITY FILES

As a matter of policy, IOs will complete a MISLE Notification as soon as they 

receive an incident notification of any kind (i.e. pollution, civil offense violation, 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART A: ADMINISTRATION

CHAPTER 6: OFFICIAL RECORDS AND REPORTS OF INVESTIGATION 

A6-2 

NOTIFICATION

B.2. INCIDENT 

INVESTIGATION 

ACTIVITY 

PREPARATION AND 

REVIEW

B.2.a. Data Collection Activities and Informal 

Investigations 

B.2.b. Unit and District Formal Investigations 

B.2.c. Marine Boards of Investigation 

B.3. CRITERION 

FOR REVIEW OF 

INCIDENT 

INVESTIGATION 

ACTIVITIES AND 

ROIS

In general, reviewers shall assure: 

• All relevant matters of fact have been explored 

• All relevant matters of fact have been adequately documented, depending on 

the level of investigation designated (data collection, informal, formal). 

• All findings of fact in matters of controversy are justified 

• All conclusions are in reference to documented findings of fact and their 

analyses 

• All conclusions are logically consistent with the findings of fact and their 

analyses 

marine casualty –reportable or not, criminal offense, etc) from the public. In all 

cases, the IO will conduct a preliminary investigation, whether that preliminary 

investigation ultimately results in a verified incident or not. This information will be 

used for comprehensive management of the Marine Safety Program. 

For data collection activities and informal investigations, responsibility for preparing 

the MISLE incident investigation activity resides with the lead IO. Review remains 

the responsibility of the Commanding Officer, who is the owner of the report. 

Where appropriate, the Commanding Officer may delegate the responsibility of 

reviewing MISLE incident investigation activities to other senior personnel. Keep in 

mind that all casualty reports, data, and analysis submitted by CG-545 to the IMO are 

derived from MISLE. As such, IOs shall follow the current MISLE process guides 

when entering incident investigations into MISLE and all units shall ensure the 

appropriate level of review is conducted on MISLE incident investigation activities 

upon their completion. It is highly recommended that all incident investigation 

activities, including pollution investigations, be reviewed by the SIO. 

For Unit and District Formal investigations, responsibility for preparing the MISLE 

incident investigation activity resides with the designated presiding officer. Review 

remains the responsibility of the Commanding Officer/ District Commander, who is 

the owner of the report. Where appropriate, the Commanding Officer may delegate 

the responsibility of reviewing MISLE incident investigation activities to other senior 

personnel. 

For Marine Boards of Investigation, responsibility for preparing the MISLE incident 

investigation activity resides with the recorder. Review is the responsibility of the 

Chair and CG-545, who is the owner of the report. The Commandant may delegate 

this responsibility as appropriate. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART A: ADMINISTRATION

CHAPTER 6: OFFICIAL RECORDS AND REPORTS OF INVESTIGATION 

A6-3 

• Causes have been adequately analyzed, depending on the case type 

• Human error has been documented and analyzed, depending on the case type 

• All evidence of violation has been referred for appropriate enforcement 

action 

• All recommendations are in reference to conclusions 

• All recommendations address conditions observed and are supported in the 

case file. 

B.4.

REQUIREMENTS FOR 

ROIS

B.5.

ENDORSEMENTS OF 

ROIS

C.1. DISPOSITION 

OF INVESTIGATIVE 

RECORDS

All incident investigation activities shall have the complete record scanned into 

MISLE. The unit shall maintain all original records in accordance with the 

Information and Life Cycle Management Manual, COMDTINST M5212.12A 

(series). 

C.2. RETENTION 

OF RECORDS OF 

HISTORICAL VALUE

The Coast Guard retains records of historical value for 100 years after final agency 

action is taken. Historical records include but are not limited to the following: 

• Reports of Marine Boards of Investigation 

D.1. GENERAL

• All data entry is in accordance with current MISLE process guides. 

ROIs are required for any formal investigation. ROIs need not be prepared for 

informal investigations or data collection activities. IOs should consider preparing an 

ROI when they feel it would more fully explain the complexities of the incident, or 

when frequent public or press scrutiny of the incident is likely. In such cases, the 

ROI shall be deemed the same as the ROI for a formal investigation. 

Depending on the party taking agency action, the Commanding Officer, District 

Commander, and Commandant may endorse an ROI. When such endorsements take 

place, they shall be integrated into the final version of the ROI, and therefore 

supersede previous unendorsed versions. 

C. RETENTION OF INVESTIGATIVE RECORDS

Any materials that cannot be scanned by the unit should be sent to Commandant 

(CG-5453) to be added to the record. 

Investigations into Major and Medium Oil or HAZMAT discharges. 

D. FORMAT AND TEMPLATE FOR REPORTS OF INVESTIGATION

ROIs are not required or desired for all investigations. In those instances where a 

substantial investigative effort has been made, however, an ROI often serves as the 

most readable documentation of our findings. Accordingly, IOs are encouraged to 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART A: ADMINISTRATION

CHAPTER 6: OFFICIAL RECORDS AND REPORTS OF INVESTIGATION 

A6-4 

D.2. MANDATORY 

STRUCTURE

D.2.a. Required Structure 

All ROIs should follow the same basic structure: 

• Executive Summary and/or Incident Brief 

• Action by the Commandant (where appropriate) 

• Action by the District Commander (where appropriate) 

• Action by the Commanding Officer/Sector Commander (where appropriate) 

• Subject(s) of the investigation 

• Findings of fact 

• Causal Analysis 

• Human Error Analysis 

• Conclusions 

• Enforcement Referrals (where appropriate) 

• Safety alerts (where appropriate) 

D.3. STYLE OF 

WRITING

D.4. USE OF 

PICTURES, DIAGRAMS, AND 

TABLES

make use of ROIs wherever they will add value. 

• Safety recommendations

ROIs are formal, agency action documents dealing in many cases with human tragedy 

and significant environmental damage. Accordingly, IOs are advised to maintain a 

highly professional and impartial tone. Speculation is discouraged, as is any informal 

or conversational style of writing. Each ROI is prepared for the convening 

authority’s endorsement and public promulgation. 

Any means of conveying complex information simply and easily is encouraged. 

Accordingly, IOs are encouraged to take full advantage of modern electronic 

document production capabilities to include photographs, diagrams, tables, and the 

like in the body of the ROI. 
USCG Marine Safety Manual 

Volume V: Investigations and Enforcement

PART A: ADMINISTRATION

Chapter Seven: 

Appeals of Reports of 

Investigation 
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART A: ADMINISTRATION

CHAPTER 7: APPEALS OF REPORTS OF INVESTIGATION 

A7-i 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

A. DECISIONS TO REOPEN AN ROI ................... 1

A.1. REOPEN, RECONSIDER OR REVISE AN ROI.......................................................................................................................1

A.1.b. Decisions to Reopen, Reconsider, or Revise ............................................................................................................1

A.2. REQUEST TO REVIEW MADE TO ENTITY TAKING FINAL ACTION .....................................................................................1

A.3. ROIS CONVENED AT THE UNIT LEVEL .............................................................................................................................1

A.4. ROIS CONVENED AT THE DISTRICT LEVEL ......................................................................................................................1

A.5. ROIS CONVENED BY THE COMMANDANT ........................................................................................................................2

B. REOPENING AN INVESTIGATION, RECONSIDERING AND 

REVISING THE ROI ............................... 2

B.1. HOW A PERSON REQUESTS TO REOPEN, RECONSIDER, OR REVISE ...................................................................................2

B.2. REASONS TO RE-OPEN, RECONSIDER, OR REVISE .............................................................................................................2

B.3. REASONS TO DECLINE......................................................................................................................................................3

B.4. DECLARING THE INVESTIGATION REOPENED....................................................................................................................3

B.5. RECEIVING INFORMATION FROM THE REQUEST TO REVISE THE REPORT..........................................................................3

B.6. SUPPLEMENTAL REPORT OF INVESTIGATION....................................................................................................................4

C. HOW A PERSON FILES AN APPEAL.................. 4

C.1. REQUEST TO REOPEN THE INVESTIGATION OR TO REVISE THE ROI..................................................................................4

C.2. ORAL REQUESTS / APPEALS..............................................................................................................................................4

C.4. TIMING OF THE REQUEST..................................................................................................................................................4

C.5. CONTENTS OF WRITTEN REQUESTS..................................................................................................................................4

D. RIGHT OF FURTHER APPEAL ...................... 4

D.1. APPEALING THE DISTRICT COMMANDER’S DECISION ......................................................................................................4

D.2. APPEALING THE COMMANDANT’S DECISION ...................................................................................................................4
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART A: ADMINISTRATION

CHAPTER 7: APPEALS OF REPORTS OF INVESTIGATION 

A7-1 

A.1. REOPEN,

RECONSIDER OR 

REVISE AN ROI 

A.1.b. Decisions to Reopen, Reconsider, or Revise 

A.2. REQUEST TO 

REVIEW MADE TO 

ENTITY TAKING 

FINAL ACTION

A.3. ROIS 

CONVENED AT THE 

UNIT LEVEL

If the Report contains: 

No safety recommendations 

Safety recommendations for the 

OCMI/COTP only 

Safety recommendations for the 

OCMI/COTP and the District 

Commander

Safety recommendations for District 

Commander only 

Safety recommendations for the 

OCMI/COTP and Commandant 

Safety recommendations for the District 

Commander and Commandant 

Safety recommendations for the 

OCMI/COTP, District Commander and 

Commandant 

Safety recommendations for the 

Commandant only 

A.4. ROIS 

CONVENED AT THE 

DISTRICT LEVEL

The following table details which Coast Guard entities take final action for 

investigations convened by the District Commander. Such investigations are usually 

District Formal Investigations. 

A. DECISIONS TO REOPEN AN ROI 

Persons affected by the findings of fact, conclusions, or safety recommendations in 

an ROI may request the Coast Guard entity taking final action to reopen the 

investigation, reconsider its conclusions, or revise the ROI. The actions on those 

requests may be appealed using the procedures in 46 CFR 1.03. 

Requests to reopen an investigation and/or to revise the ROI must be directed to the 

Coast Guard entity taking final action. Final action to be taken as a result of an ROI 

is taken by the convening authority except when the ROI contains safety 

recommendations directed to a senior command. 

The following table details which Coast Guard entities take final action for 

investigations convened by the OCMI/COTP. Such investigations include data 

collection activities, informal investigations, and unit formal investigations.

Final Action is Taken By: 

OCMI/COTP 

OCMI/COTP 

District Commander 

District Commander 

Commandant 

Commandant 

Commandant 

Commandant 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART A: ADMINISTRATION

CHAPTER 7: APPEALS OF REPORTS OF INVESTIGATION 

A7-2 

If the Report contains: 

No safety recommendations 

Safety recommendations for the 

OCMI/COTP only 

Safety recommendations for the 

OCMI/COTP and the District 

Commander

Safety recommendations for District 

Commander only 

Safety recommendations for the 

OCMI/COTP and Commandant 

Safety Recommendations for the District 

Commander and Commandant 

Safety recommendations for the 

OCMI/COTP, District Commander and 

Commandant 

Safety recommendations for the 

Commandant only 

A.5. ROIS 

CONVENED BY THE 

COMMANDANT

B.1. HOW A 

PERSON REQUESTS TO 

REOPEN,

RECONSIDER, OR 

REVISE

B.2. REASONS TO 

RE-OPEN,

RECONSIDER, OR 

REVISE

While each situation must be evaluated on its own merits, the following are general 

reasons to reopen an investigation or revise the ROI: 

• There are overt errors of fact in the ROI. 

• There is reason to believe that evidence was presented to the IO but not 

evaluated in the ROI. 

Final Action is Taken By: 

District Commander 

District Commander 

District Commander 

District Commander 

Commandant 

Commandant 

Commandant 

Commandant 

The Commandant always takes final action for investigations convened by the 

Commandant. Such investigations are usually Marine Boards of Investigation. 

B. REOPENING AN INVESTIGATION, RECONSIDERING AND 

REVISING THE ROI 

As with all such public requests for a formal decision, a person wishing to have the 

Coast Guard reopen an investigation, reconsider, or revise an ROI should detail their 

request in writing to the Coast Guard entity taking agency action. The request 

should, at a minimum, be timely, explain the reasons why the Coast Guard should 

reopen, reconsider, or revise, and must provide sufficient material in way of evidence, 

etc., to allow the Coast Guard to fully evaluate the line of argument. A request to 

reopen an investigation because new evidence has emerged, for instance, should 

include descriptions of that evidence so that the Coast Guard can evaluate the 

situation. A timely request is one that, if granted, will likely result in a meaningful 

improvement to the investigation process as applied to the particular investigation, 

findings, conclusions, or safety recommendations contained in the ROI. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART A: ADMINISTRATION

CHAPTER 7: APPEALS OF REPORTS OF INVESTIGATION 

A7-3 

• Credible new evidence has emerged which bears directly on conclusions in 

the ROI. 

• Credible new analysis of the existing facts has emerged which bears directly 

on conclusions in the ROI. 

B.3. REASONS TO 

DECLINE

Again, each situation must be evaluated on its own merits. The following, however, 

are general reasons to decline to reopen or revise: 

• The investigation/ ROI is so old that the value to marine safety in revising 

the ROI does not justify the effort required to reopen or revise. 

• The points raised in the request are so minor that the value to marine safety 

in revising the ROI does not justify the effort required to reopen or revise. 

• The new evidence submitted is not relevant to the Coast Guard’s findings and 

conclusions, and no new finding or conclusion would be warranted. 

• The new evidence is not credible. 

• The evidence was adequately evaluated during the original investigation. 

• The new analysis is not relevant to the Coast Guard’s findings and 

conclusions. 

• The new analysis is not credible. 

• The analysis was adequately evaluated during the original investigation. 

• There is no evidence that parties in interest requested their participatory 

rights under 46 CFR 4.07 in a timely manner. 

B.4. DECLARING 

THE INVESTIGATION 

REOPENED

B.5. RECEIVING 

INFORMATION FROM 

THE REQUEST TO 

REVISE THE REPORT

• There is reason to believe that parties in interest were denied their 

participatory rights under 46 CFR 4.07. 

• Possible criminal or civil offenses referred for adjudication have been 

subsequently found not proved. 

If the Coast Guard entity that convened an investigation determines that further 

investigation is warranted in the interest of marine safety, that entity may reopen an 

investigation. An investigation is declared reopened through the same mechanisms 

that a new investigation is convened, with the precepts appropriately altered to 

include the body of existing evidence, analysis, findings, conclusions, and 

recommendations. Generally speaking, the convening authority should include in the 

precept the specific issues to be addressed rather than requiring an entirely new 

investigation. The investigation is reopened upon issuance of these precepts. 

Once an investigation has been reopened, the IO or Marine Board may receive 

evidence and testimony relevant to the issues for which the investigation was 

reopened. In general, the procedures for receiving evidence and testimony are the 

same as those for any other investigation. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART A: ADMINISTRATION

CHAPTER 7: APPEALS OF REPORTS OF INVESTIGATION 

A7-4 

B.6.

SUPPLEMENTAL 

REPORT OF 

INVESTIGATION

C.1. REQUEST TO 

REOPEN THE 

INVESTIGATION OR 

TO REVISE THE ROI 

C.2. ORAL 

REQUESTS / APPEALS

C.4. TIMING OF 

THE REQUEST

C.5. CONTENTS OF 

WRITTEN REQUESTS

D.1. APPEALING 

THE DISTRICT 

COMMANDER’S 

DECISION

D.2. APPEALING 

THE COMMANDANT’S 

DECISION

When no additional investigation is required, the Coast Guard entity taking final 

action may simply issue a supplemental ROI. In this case, the investigation need not 

be declared reopened. When a supplemental ROI is issued, an entry should be made 

documenting the fact and explaining the nature and reasons for the 

changes/revisions. 

C. HOW A PERSON FILES AN APPEAL

When a person wishes to have an ROI revised, they must request it in writing to the 

Coast Guard entity that convened the investigation. The decision of that entity on 

the request is then subject to appeal under 46 CFR 1.03. Appeals may not be filed 

without a preceding request to reopen an investigation or to revise the ROI.

As a matter of policy, oral requests to revise an ROI and oral appeals of decisions 

shall not be accepted. In this instance, the person should be informed that the Coast 

Guard will take action only on written requests and appeals. 

Under 46 CFR 1.03, appeals must be filed within 30 days of the decision or of the last 

administrative action on the issue at hand. Upon written request, the 30 day period 

may be extended for good cause. 

An appeal must contain a description of the action or decision being appealed and 

the person’s reason(s) why the decision or action should be revised. In the case of a 

ROI, it should include a copy of the decision at issue and any underlying evidence 

which must be evaluated.

D. RIGHT OF FURTHER APPEAL

When the District Commander makes a decision on a person’s appeal of the OCMI 

decision, the District Commander’s decision may in turn be appealed to the 

Commandant under 46 CFR 1.03-25. As with the previous appeal, the person must 

follow the procedures for appeal contained in 46 CFR 1.03-15. 

A person may request the Commandant review his or her decision, but there is no 

right of further appeal of the Commandant’s decisions under 46 CFR 1.03. 
USCG Marine Safety Manual 

Volume V: Investigations and Enforcement

PART A: ADMINISTRATION 

Chapter Eight: 

Public and Media Relations
 

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 
USCG Marine Safety Manual, Volume V: Investigations and Enforcement 

PART A: ADMINISTRATION 

CHAPTER 8: PUBLIC AND MEDIA RELATIONS 

A8-i 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

A. CONFIDENTIALITY IN MARINE INVESTIGATION ......... 1

A.1. INTRODUCTION...........................................................................................................................................................1 

A.2. RECORDS OF MARINE CASUALTY INVESTIGATIONS.........................................................................................1 

A.3. POLLUTION, PERSONNEL ACTION, AN CIVIL OFFENSES INVESTIGATIONS .................................................2 

A.4. CRIMINAL INVESTIGATIONS ...................................................................................................................................2 

A.5. RULES OF THUMB.......................................................................................................................................................2 

B. MECHANISMS FOR PUBLIC INFORMATION .............. 2

B.1. INTRODUCTION...........................................................................................................................................................3 

B.2. FOIA REQUESTS...........................................................................................................................................................3 

B.3. INTEVIEWS ...................................................................................................................................................................3 

C. TIMING OF BRIEFINGS, INTERVIEWS, AND PRESS RELEASES

............................................. 3

C.1. INTRODUCTION...........................................................................................................................................................3 

C.2. DEATHS OR SERIOUS INJURY...................................................................................................................................3 

C.3. PARITIES OF INTEREST..............................................................................................................................................3 
 

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 
USCG Marine Safety Manual, Volume V: Investigations and Enforcement 

PART A: ADMINISTRATION 

CHAPTER 8: PUBLIC AND MEDIA RELATIONS 

A8-1 

A.1.

INTRODUCTION

A.2. RECORDS OF 

MARINE CASUALTY 

INVESTIGATIONS

By law, the Coast Guard must make available to the public, for inspection or copying, 

investigative reports, vessel casualty reports, personal injury reports, casualty report 

transmittal letters, and records of investigations, which are required to be preserved 

by the Coast Guard. 

The record of an investigation of vessel casualty made by a Marine Board or an IO 

must be made available at any stage of the investigation, upon written application to 

the Chair of the Marine Board or, in other investigations, to the OCMI having 

jurisdiction. Availability is contingent upon: 

That the record is in a form suitable for release. For example: report forms, 

messages, written statements, etc., are readily available. Un-transcribed stenographer 

notes or tapes, undeveloped film, etc., are not readily available. 

Making the materials available must not interfere with fact-gathering process. 

The material is not exempt from disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act. 

(Remember that Marine Information for Safety and Law Enforcement (MISLE) 

printouts can only be released by Commandant – see, Freedom of Information and 

Privacy Acts Manual, COMDTINST M5260.3. 

ROIs by Marine Boards will be considered complete and may be released when 

Commandant has taken action, except to the extent they contain information related 

to national security. 

ROIs by IOs on vessel casualties not submitted in narrative form will be considered 

complete and may be released when action has been taken by the final reviewing 

authority in accordance with other policy. 

A. CONFIDENTIALITY IN MARINE INVESTIGATION

The first paragraph of Public Affairs Manual, COMDTINST M5728.2 states that “it 

is the policy of the United States Coast Guard to make available to the public all 

information concerning the activities of the service except that which is restricted by 

law, and to do so in a frank, forthright and expeditious manner.” The manual gives 

you three good, general rules for the release of information: (1) if you are responsible 

for something, you can talk about it; (2) if you are not responsible for something, 

don’t talk about it; (3) if you are uncertain, seek guidance before talking about it. This 

section will provide additional, more specific guidance on what you can and cannot 

release during marine investigations. 

When releasing information to the press, remember to only release facts that are not 

in dispute. An example of facts in dispute is conflicting statements regarding the time 

of the incident. If one mariner says 0100 and another mariner says 0300, you, as the 

IO, cannot release the time of incident; however, you may state that the incident 

occurred in the early hours of the morning provided all factual accounts agree. 
USCG Marine Safety Manual, Volume V: Investigations and Enforcement 

PART A: ADMINISTRATION 

CHAPTER 8: PUBLIC AND MEDIA RELATIONS 

A8-2 

A.3. POLLUTION,

PERSONNEL ACTION, AND CIVIL OFFENSES 

INVESTIGATIONS

Pollution, personnel action, and civil offenses investigations are not open to the 

public. If one of these investigations reaches the media you may acknowledge that 

there is an on-going investigation when the COTP/OCMI has determined that there 

is sufficient evidence to believe that a violation of law or regulations was committed. 

This decision is reached when either the case is closed with a warning or the case is 

submitted to a Hearing Officer or Administrative Law Judge. 

A.4. CRIMINAL 

INVESTIGATIONS

A.5. RULES OF 

THUMB

When dealing with the public or the media, there are some basic rules with regard to 

the interview and specifics on what to say. They are listed below. 

If the situation allows, set ground rules on the interview. Explain what information 

you can give and what you can’t give. 

Never speculate or give personal opinion. If you make a statement, it is always on 

the record. 

Never respond with “No comment.” Explain briefly why you will not or cannot 

answer the question. When doing this, make sure it is a valid reason. Some good 

responses are: 

 “I’d rather not speculate . . . let’s deal in the facts only.” 

 “That information is classified.”

 “Answering that question may jeopardize the investigation in progress” 

B.1.

INTRODUCTION

If an investigation is significant in scope and exposure, you may confirm in general 

terms that an investigation is in progress since the media will gather this information 

from private sources. Generally, this only applies as a result of a sizable marine 

casualty or pollution response. 

All inquiries, including those from the media or the public, regarding matters for 

which criminal prosecution is being considered, or for which referral to DOJ has 

been made, should be referred to the servicing Legal Office. Upon receiving a 

request for information about such cases, the servicing Legal Officer should consult 

with the appropriate DOJ attorneys to ensure that any information provided does not 

inadvertently violate Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure or court orders, or 

otherwise compromise ongoing investigations. The same guidance applies to press 

releases about the case. The servicing Legal Officer should ensure that the Public 

Affairs Office is appropriately informed of restrictions on information provided 

about criminal investigations and prosecutions of cases in which the Coast Guard is 

involved. 

B. MECHANISMS FOR PUBLIC INFORMATION

There are many methods of delivering information to the public. They range from 

personal interviews to news conferences. They are all listed in COMDTINST 

M5728.2 (series), Public Affairs Manual and COMDTINST M5260.3 (series), 
USCG Marine Safety Manual, Volume V: Investigations and Enforcement 

PART A: ADMINISTRATION 

CHAPTER 8: PUBLIC AND MEDIA RELATIONS 

A8-3 

B.2. FOIA

REQUESTS

B.3. INTERVIEWS Interviews via telephone or in person are the most common form of Coast Guard 

news release. Generally speaking, if an incident that is being investigated is large 

enough, the media will contact the Coast Guard. It is important to relay to the media 

the facts that are not in dispute. This will ensure to the public and the media that the 

Coast Guard is forthcoming with important information. 

C.1.

INTRODUCTION

C.2. DEATHS OR 

SERIOUS INJURY

C.3. PARTIES IN 

INTEREST

Freedom of Information and Privacy Acts Manual. The main methods that IOs 

encounter are Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests and the interviews by 

the media. 

When a member of the public wishes information from records kept by the Coast 

Guard they must submit a FOIA request. All Marine Casualty records that are closed 

are maintained and owned by Commandant. FOIA request should be sent directly to 

CG-5453 so they can be processed. Casualty reports shall not be released by field 

units. 

Conversely, there are some lesser interest investigations in which you may wish to 

contact the press. Generally, you would take this course of action if you wanted to 

increase the public’s awareness of those conditions and practices that precipitate 

marine casualties, as well as adding to their sense of trust and understanding about 

the operations of the Coast Guard’s Marine Safety Program. 

C. TIMING OF BRIEFINGS, INTERVIEWS, AND PRESS RELEASES

There are several issues that come into play when considering the timing of the 

release of information. In this particular case the issues are primarily related to 

marine casualty investigations. There must be a balance between getting the 

information out and respect for the privacy/personal issues of those involved. 

Any time the Coast Guard is called to conduct an investigation and there is a death or 

serious injury involved, the IO on-scene should never release the names of the 

victims. As a courtesy to victims’ family members, they should be the first to be 

notified prior to reading about it or seeing it on television. 

Parties in interest have certain rights throughout a marine casualty investigation. As a 

courtesy, upon completion of an investigation, the final report should not be released 

to the public until the parties in interest have had a chance to see it. All briefings, 

interviews, and press releases should wait until that time. 
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 
USCG Marine Safety Manual 

Volume V: Investigations and Enforcement

PART A: ADMINISTRATION 

Chapter Nine: 

Congressman James Sener

Award 
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART A: ADMINISTRATION

CHAPTER 9: CONGRESSMAN JAMES SENER AWARD 

A9-i 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

A. PROGRAM OVERVIEW............................ 1

A.1. PURPOSE ..........................................................................................................................................................................1

A.2. BACKGROUND..................................................................................................................................................................1

A.3. CORE VALUES AND CONCEPTS.........................................................................................................................................1

A.4. SCOPE ..............................................................................................................................................................................2

A.5. APPLICATION PROCESS ....................................................................................................................................................2

A.6. EVALUATION PANEL ........................................................................................................................................................2

A.7. ANNOUNCEMENT OF AWARDS .........................................................................................................................................2

B. KEY CHARACTERISTICS OF THE EVALUATION CRITERIA ... 2

B.1. CRITERIA AS AN EVALUATION SYSTEM............................................................................................................................2

B.2. SYSTEMS APPROACH........................................................................................................................................................2

C. EVALUATION SYSTEM ........................... 3

C.1. APPROACH .......................................................................................................................................................................3

C.2. PROFESSIONALISM OF THE INVESTIGATIVE EFFORT .........................................................................................................3

C.3. TIMELINESS AND WORKLOAD ..........................................................................................................................................3

C.4. SALIENCE OF MARINE SAFETY ISSUES PRESENT IN THE INCIDENT ...................................................................................4

C.5. QUALITY OF THE FINDINGS OF FACT ................................................................................................................................4

C.6. QUALITY OF THE CAUSE ANALYSIS..................................................................................................................................4

C.7. QUALITY OF THE HUMAN ERROR ANALYSIS ....................................................................................................................5

C.8. IMPACT AND QUALITY OF THE SAFETY RECOMMENDATIONS...........................................................................................5

C.9. IMPACT AND QUALITY OF THE PUBLIC AWARENESS INFORMATION .................................................................................6

C.10. APPROPRIATENESS OF ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS INITIATED............................................................................................7

D. FORMAT OF SUBMISSIONS........................ 7

D.1. APPLICATION LETTER ......................................................................................................................................................7

D.2. REPORT OF INVESTIGATION AND SAFETY ALERTS ...........................................................................................................7

D.3. MISLE ACTIVITY ............................................................................................................................................................7

D.4. TESTIMONIALS .................................................................................................................................................................7

D.5. OTHER ENCLOSURES........................................................................................................................................................7
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART A: ADMINISTRATION

CHAPTER 9: CONGRESSMAN JAMES SENER AWARD 

A9-1 

A.1. PURPOSE The purpose of the Sener Award program is to: 

• Educate Coast Guard personnel about the meaning and value of the Marine 

Investigation Program; 

• Encourage the conduct of the very finest marine investigation throughout 

the Coast Guard; 

• Share the best marine investigation practices; 

• Recognize units and investigative teams that have demonstrated exceptional 

investigative skill and have most positively influenced marine safety; and 

A.2. BACKGROUND

A.3. CORE VALUES 

AND CONCEPTS

The award evaluation criteria are built on two core values and concepts. These values 

and concepts are the foundation of the modern Marine Safety Program: 

• Severe incidents require exhaustive investigative response. Incidents 

have value to marine safety when they have particularly severe consequences, 

affect many people, or are of such notoriety that the American public must be 

assured that corrective action has been or will be taken. We must fully 

investigate all such incidents. 

A. PROGRAM OVERVIEW

• Publicize the "value add" of the Marine Investigations Program.

The Coast Guard’s Marine Investigations Program has been a vital arm of its marine 

safety activities since 1838 when the program’s predecessor, the Steamboat 

Inspection Service, was established. In 1832 alone, approximately 14% of the steam 

vessels in operation were destroyed by explosion and over 1000 people were killed. 

These explosions happened largely because there were no inspection laws or rules of 

navigation. In some cases, mariner incompetence, negligence, and/or misconduct 

were contributing hazards. The U.S. Congress reacted to these facts by establishing 

inspection laws and creating the Steamship Inspection Service. Congressman James 

Sener of Virginia sponsored the legislation that created the modern Marine 

Investigation Program on June 20, 1874. Congressman Sener’s bill put in place the 

world’s most effective system for identifying and eliminating unsafe conditions in the 

marine transportation system, perhaps the single greatest step forward known in 

marine safety. The Sener award honors and recalls his contribution to the safety of 

mariners, vessels, and the marine environment through marine investigation. 

• Superior investigation of incidents builds a case for change. Superior 

investigation of less severe incidents can be of equal or greater value to 

marine safety when the information in that report, combined with other 

similar reports, builds a case for change. We must pursue the case for change 

through superior investigation of incidents that raise important safety issues,

regardless of their consequence.
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART A: ADMINISTRATION

CHAPTER 9: CONGRESSMAN JAMES SENER AWARD 

A9-2 

A.4. SCOPE

A.5. APPLICATION 

PROCESS

A.6. EVALUATION 

PANEL

A.7.

ANNOUNCEMENT OF 

AWARDS

B.1. CRITERIA AS 

AN EVALUATION 

SYSTEM

B.2. SYSTEMS 

APPROACH

The criteria focus on the impact a specific marine investigation had on marine safety 

generally, and on the processes involved in conducting a particular marine 

investigation that achieved results at the highest level. All criteria directly relate to 

results and key investigative processes. 

Area and District Commanders, OCMIs and COTPs may submit applications 

justifying presentation of the Sener Award for up to three marine investigations 

completed (closed) by their unit(s) during the preceding calendar year. Applications 

must be completed in accordance with this guide and are due to CG-545 not later 

than 01 March. Applications received later than 01 March will not be considered by 

CG-545 during that award cycle. Awards related to particularly noteworthy 

investigations completed/closed during previous years may be submitted with 

justification of late submission. 

CG-545 will empanel selected military and civilian members of the Coast Guard 

deemed to have expertise in marine investigation and marine safety generally for the 

purpose of evaluating the applications. The board shall provide to CG-545 prioritized 

recommendations for the selection of three Sener Award winners. In the event that 

fewer (or no) applications meet the criteria for the Sener Award, the panel shall 

recommend that no such award be given during that calendar year. 

Following the approval of the Evaluation Panel’s selection, CG-545 will present the 

Sener Award to the Commanding Officers responsible for the selected marine 

investigations for that specific investigation. Team and/or personnel awards for the 

specific investigative team involved will be considered as appropriate and forwarded 

separately. Three Sener Awards will typically be presented annually. Such awards shall 

be made in as public a forum as reasonably available. 

B. KEY CHARACTERISTICS OF THE EVALUATION CRITERIA

The criteria guidelines below comprise an evaluation system. The criteria are set of 

results oriented requirements. While the evaluation panel is not strictly bound to a 

specific weighting of these criteria, each criteria must be explicitly evaluated. The 

program anticipates that the panel’s evaluations will be returned to the originators 

and serve as a useful management tool that goes beyond most performance reviews.

All of the criteria specified below originate in the view that system accidents do not 

result from a single factor, either human error or mechanical failure. Complex 

systems, such as the maritime transportation system, simply possess too many proven 

defenses for a single factor to pose a significant threat in itself. Instead, major 

tragedies appear to result from a strange and unforeseen combination of events and 

factors, each occurring at exactly the right time and place to enable the next. 

Together, the threats build or synergize; each single factor is necessary (the accident 

couldn’t happen without it), but insufficient without the others. Thus the criteria 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART A: ADMINISTRATION

CHAPTER 9: CONGRESSMAN JAMES SENER AWARD 

A9-3 

C.1. APPROACH The panel evaluating submissions for the Sener Award will consider the following 

criteria in recommending a specific marine investigation for selection: 

• Professionalism of the investigative effort; 

• Timeliness and workload; 

• Salience of marine safety issues present in the incident; 

• Quality of the findings of fact; 

• Quality of the cause analysis; 

• Quality of the Human Error Analysis; 

• Impact and quality of safety recommendations; 

• Impact and quality of public awareness information; and 

C.2.

PROFESSIONALISM OF 

THE INVESTIGATIVE 

EFFORT

The professionalism criterion examines the success of the investigative effort in 

creating public and inter-agency confidence through the professional handling of the 

day-to-day marine investigative operation. This criterion addresses: 

• Whether the investigative team was successful identifying and productively 

involving parties-in-interest; 

• Whether release of appropriate information about the incident and the course

of the investigation was expeditious and responsive; 

• Whether the investigative team employed unique, unusual, or noteworthy 

techniques demonstrating particular expertise in the conduct of marine 

investigation fact finding or analysis; 

• Whether the conduct of the investigation substantially built the Coast Guard’s 

reputation as the premier marine investigation agency; and 

C.3. TIMELINESS 

AND WORKLOAD

The timeliness and workload criterion examines the success of the investigative effort 

in balancing the workload and resource issues involved in marine investigation to 

produce timely public awareness information and a Report of Investigation (ROI). 

This criterion addresses: 

• Whether the ROI and public awareness information were produced in a 

together emphasize the structure underlying these apparently random coincidences 

that conspire to create tragedies. 

C. EVALUATION SYSTEM

• Appropriateness of enforcement action initiated. 

• Whether inter-agency or inter-government relationships involved were of 

particular note or required unusual diplomacy in their handling. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART A: ADMINISTRATION

CHAPTER 9: CONGRESSMAN JAMES SENER AWARD 

A9-4 

timely fashion; 

• How unit workload and resources were allocated to facilitate the production 

of a significant investigation; 

• How efficiently the investigative results were produced; 

• Whether atypical investigative resources, whether inside or outside the Coast 

Guard, were employed by the investigative team; and 

C.4. SALIENCE OF 

MARINE SAFETY 

ISSUES PRESENT IN 

THE INCIDENT

The salient criterion examines the success of the investigative effort in detecting that 

salient marine safety issues were present in the incident and in taking advantage of the 

opportunity available. This criterion addresses: 

• Whether the investigation addressed an incident of unusual severity or 

consequence; 

• Whether the investigation addressed an incident of unusual notoriety 

requiring public assurance of Coast Guard action; 

• Whether the investigation addresses an incident of lesser severity that builds a 

cohesive case for change; and 

C.5. QUALITY OF 

THE FINDINGS OF 

FACT

The findings of fact criterion examines the thoroughness and success of the 

investigative effort in documenting or divining the actual facts of the incident. This 

criterion addresses: 

• Whether the facts were documented using a systems approach as defined in 

the SHEL model; 

• The investigative difficulty involved in documenting the facts; 

• The degree to which sophisticated technical or inferential analysis was used to 

reliably determine the facts when direct evidence was not available; 

• Whether evidence adequately and directly supported the findings of fact; 

• The clarity with which these findings were presented; and 

C.6. QUALITY OF 

THE CAUSE ANALYSIS

The cause analysis criterion examines the success of the investigative effort in 

determining and explaining the causes of the incident at all levels using Dr. Reason’s 

model of systems accident causation. This criterion addresses: 

• Whether cause analysis could reasonably be conducted based on the findings 

• Whether investigative relationships were exploited in a noteworthy fashion to 

allow the depth and timeliness of the investigative effort. 

• Whether the investigation demonstrates unusual willingness and ability to 

detect and capitalize on critical issues latent in an incident, regardless of 

severity. 

• Whether events, actions, and conditions throughout the Marine 

Transportation System (MTS) were noted for cause analysis. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART A: ADMINISTRATION

CHAPTER 9: CONGRESSMAN JAMES SENER AWARD 

A9-5 

of fact; 

• Whether the investigation team correctly analyzed the causes following Dr. 

Reason’s systems accident causation model; 

• Whether the cause analysis identifies and explains the initiating event; 

• Whether the cause analysis identifies and explains successive failures in 

defenses; 

• Whether latent unsafe conditions are properly explained; 

• Whether latent unsafe conditions in Organizations, Workplaces, 

Preconditions, and Defenses are identified; 

• Whether active failures in Production and Defenses are identified; 

• Whether the trajectory of events through these latent unsafe conditions and 

active failures is adequately explained; 

• Whether unsafe conditions, active failures, and their relationships referenced 

findings of fact; 

• Whether the ROI conveys the language and meaning of systems accident 

causes; and 

C.7. QUALITY OF 

THE HUMAN ERROR 

ANALYSIS

The Human Error Analysis criterion examines the success of the investigative effort 

in examining any human error present using the Generic Error Modeling System 

(GEMS) and in initiating enforcement action based upon that analysis. This criterion 

addresses: 

• Whether human error was present in the incident; 

• Whether the investigation team correctly analyzed that human error following 

the GEMS process; 

• Whether the human error analyzed was the active failure in production 

leading to the initiating event; 

• Whether the outcome of the GEMS analysis was accounted for in safety 

recommendations related to defenses against that error; 

• Whether the outcome of the GEMS analysis was accounted for in any public 

awareness information related to that error; and 

C.8. IMPACT AND 

QUALITY OF THE 

SAFETY 

The safety recommendations criterion examines the success and impact of safety 

recommendations generated by the marine investigation. This criterion addresses: 

• The clarity with which the specific conclusions about cause in the incident 

were presented. 

• Whether the outcome of the GEMS analysis was accounted for in or 

influenced the nature of any enforcement action referral related to the active 

failure. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART A: ADMINISTRATION

CHAPTER 9: CONGRESSMAN JAMES SENER AWARD 

A9-6 

RECOMMENDATIONS • Whether the safety recommendations address causes at all levels; 

• Whether each safety recommendation was demonstrably linked to a specific 

latent unsafe condition; 

• Whether each recommended action could, if implemented, reasonably be seen 

to eliminate or defend against a latent unsafe condition or active failure; 

• Whether the recommended action was technologically or otherwise practically 

feasible; 

• Whether the safety recommendation took account of the Coast Guard’s span 

of control and was addressed to the appropriate authority; 

• Whether the safety recommendation was successful (i.e., whether the 

cognizant level of command accepted the recommended action);

• Whether the recommended action was in fact executed; and 

C.9. IMPACT AND 

QUALITY OF THE 

PUBLIC AWARENESS 

INFORMATION

The public awareness criterion examines the degree to which public and industry 

awareness of latent unsafe conditions and active failures was elevated by means of the 

marine investigation. This criterion addresses: 

• The readability and information content of the ROI as a public awareness 

instrument; 

• Whether the marine investigation generated safety alerts or other public 

awareness efforts; 

• The success and sophistication of the marine investigation effort in 

professionally conveying public awareness information and in responding to 

public information inquiries; 

• Whether the public awareness information addressed causes at all levels; 

• Whether public awareness information highlighted actionable and specific 

latent unsafe conditions; 

• Whether the informed public or industry did in fact execute changes based on 

the information; and 

• The size of MTS community positively influenced by the executed action.

• The size of MTS community positively influenced by the public awareness

information. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART A: ADMINISTRATION

CHAPTER 9: CONGRESSMAN JAMES SENER AWARD 

A9-7 

C.10.

APPROPRIATENESS OF 

ENFORCEMENT 

ACTIONS INITIATED

The enforcement action criterion examines the degree to which enforcement action 

was appropriately initiated. This criterion addresses: 

• Whether there were actionable violations present requiring enforcement 

action; 

• The sophistication and clarity of decisions related to appropriate enforcement 

action and methods; 

• Whether enforcement action was initiated and was appropriate to the 

offenses in question; 

• Whether enforcement action referrals (if any) provided sufficient basis for 

reasonable prosecution; and 

D.1. APPLICATION 

LETTER

D.2. REPORT OF 

INVESTIGATION AND 

SAFETY ALERTS

D.3. MISLE

ACTIVITY

D.4.

TESTIMONIALS

D.5. OTHER 

ENCLOSURES

• The final effect of any enforcement action in terms of individual and public 

deterrence and remedy. 

D. FORMAT OF SUBMISSIONS

Area and District Commanders, Sector Commanders, OCMIs, and COTPs may 

submit applications for the Sener Award via the chain of command by standard Coast 

Guard letter. Such application letters should note the investigation involved, MISLE 

activity number, and the members of the investigative team. Where the investigative 

team involves personnel outside the Coast Guard, such personnel should also be 

noted in the application letter. Although the submitting command may include 

whatever information they deem relevant to the Sener Award evaluation panel, the 

application letter should address each of the evaluation criteria above and make a 

recommendation as to whether team or personal awards are appropriate and whether 

awards have been given to the investigative team. Chain of command endorsements 

of the application are not required but highly recommended. 

Submissions for the Sener Award must include the text ROI and copies of any Coast 

Guard generated safety alerts as attachments. Where the only text report is a MISLE 

narrative, a printout of this narrative must be included. 

Submissions for the Sener Award need not include printouts of the MISLE activity or 

case (except as above), though the MISLE activity number must be included in the 

application letter. Submitters should be apprised that the Evaluation Panel will review 

the MISLE activity for completeness and quality as part of the evaluation. 

Submissions for the Sener Award shall not include testimonials or letters of 

recommendation from inside or outside the Coast Guard. The Sener award is not to 

be seen as a campaign or plea for public support. 

Submitters for the Sener Award should feel free to enclose such material as they feel 

amplifies or illustrates the information contained in their application letter. Copies of 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART A: ADMINISTRATION

CHAPTER 9: CONGRESSMAN JAMES SENER AWARD 

A9-8 

enclosures to the ROI (evidence) such as photos and the like shall not normally be 

forwarded with the application letter. 
USCG Marine Safety Manual 

Volume V: Investigations and Enforcement

PART B: INVESTIGATION

Chapter One: 

The Marine Investigation 

Process
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
USCG Marine Safety Manual, Volume V: Investigations and Enforcement 

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 1: THE MARINE INVESTIGATION PROCESS 

B1-i 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

A. THE MARINE INVESTIGATION PROCESS .............. 1

A.1. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................................................1

A.1.a. General.....................................................................................................................................................................1

A.1.b. Comparison of Coast Guard and IMO methodologies.............................................................................................1

A.2. GENERATING A TIMELINE ................................................................................................................................................2

A.3. CAUSAL ANALYSIS ..........................................................................................................................................................2

A.4. HUMAN ERROR ANALYSIS ...............................................................................................................................................2

A.5. CONCLUSIONS ..................................................................................................................................................................2

A.6. SAFETY RECOMMENDATIONS...........................................................................................................................................2

A.7. VIOLATION ANALYSIS......................................................................................................................................................3
 

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
USCG Marine Safety Manual, Volume V: Investigations and Enforcement 

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 1: THE MARINE INVESTIGATION PROCESS 

A.1.

INTRODUCTION

A.1.a. General 

A.1.b. Comparison of Coast Guard and IMO methodologies 

A. THE MARINE INVESTIGATION PROCESS

In complex systems, such as the maritime transportation system, there are many 

interactions between the operational parts of the system including: mariners, 

shoreside workers, management, vessel equipment and material, facilities, vessel 

traffic services, navigational aids, publications, charts, manuals, and the environment. 

Because of the complexity of the maritime transportation system, there is the 

constant danger that critical information will be overlooked or lost during a marine 

investigation. To avoid this, the Coast Guard's Marine Investigation Process, which 

is based on and mirrors the approach prescribed by the International Maritime 

Organization (IMO), was developed. The steps of that process are listed in the figure 

below along with a visual representation of their relationship to the corresponding 

steps in the IMO’s systematic approach. 

B1-1 
USCG Marine Safety Manual, Volume V: Investigations and Enforcement 

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 1: THE MARINE INVESTIGATION PROCESS 

B1-2 

A.2. GENERATING 

A TIMELINE

A.3. CAUSAL 

ANALYSIS

After collecting all pertinent information and the development of the accident 

timeline, the IO conducts Causal Analysis to determine “how and why” it happened. 

The process of conducting Causal Analysis can be thought of as occurring in several 

stages: 

• Identify the Initiating Event, Subsequent Events, and the Defense Failures 

that allowed Subsequent Events to occur. 

• Identify the Unsafe Act(s)/Decision(s), Condition(s), and Defense Failures 

that allowed the Initiating Event to occur. 

• Identify the remaining Causal Factors with regard to Unsafe 

Act(s)/Decision(s) and Condition(s) in the model of production. 

A.4. HUMAN ERROR 

ANALYSIS

For every unsafe act or decision identified in the first stage of the causal analysis, the 

IO should determine the type of human error involved using the GEMS process: 

• Determine whether the unsafe act or decision was a Planning Error or 

Execution Error. 

• Determine the classification of Planning or Execution Error. 

A.5. CONCLUSIONS Conclusions are the results of the Causal and Human Error analysis as they relate to 

the accident. Conclusions should generally be stated in a “cause=effect” statement 

with as little ‘analysis lingo’ as possible. Conclusions are classified as either direct or 

inferred. A direct conclusion is made when the analysis of factual information and 

associated evidence leads to only one possible outcome. An inferred conclusion is 

made when the analysis of factual information and associated evidence leads to one 

or more possible results and the investigator must rely on his/her or some other 

person’s professional experience and knowledge to decide which of the possible 

results is most likely true. 

A.6. SAFETY 

RECOMMENDATIONS

The purpose of Safety Recommendations is to propose corrective actions for 

identified unsafe conditions or other unwanted outcomes in order to prevent those 

Following the detection/notification of an incident and subsequent fact-finding, the 

timeline is used to document the “who, what, when and where” of the accident. The 

IO should use the SHEL model as an interviewing and organizational tool for the 

collection of factual information regarding the human aspects of the accident that 

make up the timeline. Once all the pertinent information has been collected and 

sequentially organized to give the “when” part of the timeline, it is classified into 

actions, events and conditions. These steps identify the “who, what and where” part 

of the timeline. See Chapter B4. 

See Chapter B4. 

See Chapter B4. 
USCG Marine Safety Manual, Volume V: Investigations and Enforcement 

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 1: THE MARINE INVESTIGATION PROCESS 

B1-3 

conditions from contributing to future casualties. They should be based upon and 

flow logically from the timeline, causal and human error analysis and conclusions of 

the investigation. To determine whether a safety recommendation is appropriate, the 

IO should ask the following questions: 

• Has the existence of a specific condition been identified? 

• Has that condition been determined to be unsafe? 

• Can control be exercised over that condition? 

• Has it been determined that controls do not currently exist that adequately 

address that condition? 

Safety recommendations must address actual unsafe conditions rather than 

hypothetical conditions. Safety recommendations may be made to address any unsafe 

condition identified during an accident investigation, including those that did not 

cause nor contribute to the specific accident under investigation. When doing so, 

IOs will need to include an explanation of the risks and probable consequences 

associated with the continued existence of the condition, as it will not necessarily be 

evident. Safety recommendations should only be made to address those unsafe 

conditions over which some level of control can be exercised through the 

implementation and use of control measures. Control measures (a.k.a. Defenses) 

include conventions, laws, regulations, policies and procedures. They should only be 

made to address unsafe conditions when one of the following is true: 

• There are no current control measures in place. 

• The current control measures are found to be inadequate.

A.7. VIOLATION 

ANALYSIS

Safety recommendations should not be made when the unsafe condition was the 

result of non-compliance with an existing control measure (e.g. a mariner ignored the 

prohibition against smoking during a transfer operation), a.k.a. A violation. See 

Chapter B6. Safety recommendations can and should be made regarding how to 

improve compliance with existing control measures. 

Violation analysis is the isolating of facts in the timeline as well as the human error 

analysis (when applicable) into the elements of a violation of law and regulation by 

any person (or sometimes, organization). When there is evidence of a violation, 

including negligence, misconduct, or willful violation by a mariner holding Coast 

Guard issued Merchant Mariner’s Credentials (MMC), civil penalty and/or criminal 

matters, the IO refers this evidence for appropriate enforcement and remedial action 

in accordance with Part C of this volume. See Chapter B5. 
 

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
USCG Marine Safety Manual 

Volume V: Investigations and Enforcement

PART B: INVESTIGATION

Chapter Two: 

Detection of Incidents
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 2: DETECTION OF INCIDENTS 

B2-i

TABLE OF CONTENTS

A. INTRODUCTION ............................... 1

A.1. ACTIVE AND PASSIVE DETECTION....................................................................................................................................1

A.2. TRENDS IN INCIDENTS......................................................................................................................................................1

B. NOTIFICATIONS FROM THE PUBLIC ................. 1

B.1. NOTICE OF MARINE CASUALTIES .....................................................................................................................................1

B.1.a. Required Notice and Report .....................................................................................................................................1

B.1.b. Timing and Contents of Notice .................................................................................................................................1

B.1.c. Timing and Contents of Report.................................................................................................................................2

B.1.d. Over-reliance on Notices and Reports .....................................................................................................................2

B.2. REPORTS OF ACCIDENTS TO AIDS TO NAVIGATION ..........................................................................................................2

B.3. REPORTS OF BOATING ACCIDENTS...................................................................................................................................2

B.4. REPORTS OF POLLUTION INCIDENTS.................................................................................................................................2

B.5. REPORTS OF HAZARDOUS CONDITIONS ............................................................................................................................3

B.6. THIRD PARTY REPORTS....................................................................................................................................................3

B.6.a. Receiving Third Party Reports.................................................................................................................................3

B.6.b. Review of Third Party Reports prior to Investigation ..............................................................................................3

C. ACTIVE SURVEILLANCE / DETECTION OPERATIONS ...... 3

C.1. INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................................................................................3

C.2. SURVEILLANCE / DETECTION PATROLS.............................................................................................................................4

C.2.a. General.....................................................................................................................................................................4

C.2.b. Surveillance and Detection in Multi-mission Patrols...............................................................................................4

C.3. CLANDESTINE COLLECTION .............................................................................................................................................4

D. NOTIFICATION FROM OTHER COAST GUARD UNITS ....... 4

D.1. NOTIFICATIONS FROM THE NATIONAL RESPONSE CENTER...............................................................................................4

D.2. NOTIFICATION OF POLLUTION OBSERVATION ..................................................................................................................4

D.3. SITUATION REPORTS (SITREPS)......................................................................................................................................5

D.4. CASUALTY REPORTS (CASREPS)....................................................................................................................................5

D.5. OPERATIONS SUMMARIES (OPSUMS) .............................................................................................................................5

E. REPORTS FROM OTHER LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES ..... 5

E.1. GENERAL..........................................................................................................................................................................5

E.2. HANDLING OF REPORTS....................................................................................................................................................6

E.3. MULTI-INCIDENT INVESTIGATION.....................................................................................................................................6

F. REPORTS FROM FOREIGN GOVERNMENTS AND THE 

INTERNATIONAL MARITIME ORGANIZATION (IMO) .......... 6

F.1. GENERAL..........................................................................................................................................................................6

F.2. REPORTS FROM FOREIGN GOVERNMENTS.........................................................................................................................6
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 2: DETECTION OF INCIDENTS

B2-1 

A. INTRODUCTION

A.1. ACTIVE AND 

PASSIVE DETECTION

The Coast Guard detects incidents in one of two ways: (1) when we are notified by 

the public or other agencies, called passive detection, and (2) when we conduct 

operations specifically designed to detect an incident, called active detection. Both 

active and passive detection’s are important to the Coast Guard’s Marine 

Investigation Program. 

A.2. TRENDS IN 

INCIDENTS

Because Coast Guard units respond to incidents on a case-by-case basis, it is easy to 

treat the incident out of context. When detecting incidents, IOs should pay particular 

attention to the incident history of a vessel, organization, person, facility, or area of 

the waterway. For instance in some cases, apparently unrelated unknown source 

discharges portray a trend in an area, and may uncover a pattern of violation. 

Similarly, a repeated history of accidents by a single company (perhaps on many 

vessels) may indicate an unsafe condition endemic to the company. Accordingly, IOs 

are strongly encouraged to view their detection efforts within the context of trends of 

incidents. 

B. NOTIFICATIONS FROM THE PUBLIC

B.1. NOTICE OF 

MARINE CASUALTIES

B.1.a. Required Notice and Report 

Commercial vessel owners, agents, operators, masters, and persons in charge are each 

responsible under 46 CFR 4.05-1 for notifying the Coast Guard that a marine casualty 

has occurred. Under 46 CFR 4.05-10, the same people are responsible for providing 

the Coast Guard with a written report (on form CG-2692 series) providing details 

about the accident. 

B.1.b. Timing and Contents of Notice 

The notice of marine casualty required by 46 CFR 4.05-1 must be given to the nearest 

Coast Guard Marine Safety or Inspection Office, or Coast Guard Group Office, as 

soon as practical after addressing the immediate safety concerns caused by the 

accident. Under 46 CFR 4.05-10(b), however, a written report can serve the purpose 

of the notice if that report is filed “without delay.” Without delay should not be 

interpreted to mean the five-day standard found in 46 CFR 4.05-10(a). If operators 

wish to submit written reports in lieu of the required notice, such reports must be 

written and delivered quickly in order to allow the Coast Guard to determine

appropriate action. The contents of the notice are listed in 46 CFR 4.05-5. Note that

reports of hazardous conditions (often the same conditions that cause or resulted 

from a casualty) are required under 33 CFR 160.215 (See 33 CFR 160.204 for a 

definition of “hazardous condition”). Also note that the reports under 33 CFR 

160.215 may not be delayed under 46 CFR 4.05-10(a). 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 2: DETECTION OF INCIDENTS

B2-2 

B.1.c. Timing and Contents of Report 

The report of marine casualty required by 46 CFR 4.05-10(a) must be given to the 

nearest Marine Safety / Inspection Office within five days of the casualty. The report 

must contain all relevant information on the CG-2692 (Report of Marine Accident, 

Death, or Injury), CG-2692A (Barge Addendum), and CG-2692B (Report of 

Required Chemical Drug And Alcohol Testing following a serious marine incident). 

Additional requirements related to post-casualty drug and alcohol testing information 

required in the report are listed in 46 CFR 4.05-12. 

B.1.d. Over-reliance on Notices and Reports 

While commercial operators are required to report all marine casualties, IOs are 

cautioned not to rely exclusively upon such reports in detecting incidents. The 

commercial maritime community is composed of a variety of operations ranging from 

large companies well versed in the rules for reporting accidents to small one-person 

operations that may be completely unfamiliar with the relevant regulations and forms. 

Accordingly, IOs must not assume an entirely passive stance with regard to detection 

of commercial vessel accidents. 

B.2. REPORTS OF 

ACCIDENTS TO AIDS 

TO NAVIGATION

Under Title 46 CFR 4.05-20, whenever a commercial vessel collides with or otherwise 

damages an aid to navigation maintained by the Coast Guard, the person in charge 

must report the incident to the nearest Officer in Charge, Marine Inspection (OCMI). 

Such incidents may not be reportable under the rules in 46 CFR 4.05-1 because the 

resulting damage may fall below the reporting threshold. In this situation, no CG2692 report is required, and the person in charge may fulfill his obligations merely by 

phoning in a report. 

B.3. REPORTS OF 

BOATING ACCIDENTS

The statutory requirement to report recreational boating accidents is contained in 46 

U.S.C. 6101. The implementing regulations, including the content of the reporting 

form and submittal procedures, are in 33 CFR 173-174. In summary, the owner or 

operator of a boat or vessel involved in a boating casualty or accident shall report the 

casualty or accident to a state reporting authority or, if no approved state reporting 

authority exists, to the Coast Guard. The report shall be made on either the Coast 

Guard Boating Accident Report, Form CG-3865, or on a state boating accident 

report form. Boating Accident investigations are discussed in detail in Chapter B12 

of this volume. 

B.4. REPORTS OF 

POLLUTION 

INCIDENTS

The responsible party (RP) must report all discharges of oil or hazardous material to 

the National Response Center (NRC). On occasion, IOs or Pollution Investigators 

(PIs) receive these reports. In such cases, the IO/PI should not assume that the 

NRC has been notified, and should request that the RP contact the NRC directly at 1-

800-424-8802. When the RP is unknown, the IO/PI shall contact the NRC to assure 

the discharge was reported. The NRC will provide the cognizant Captain of the Port 

(COTP) with a summarization of the report. Many if not most pollution incident 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 2: DETECTION OF INCIDENTS

B2-3 

investigations will be launched based upon notification from the NRC. 

B.5. REPORTS OF 

HAZARDOUS 

CONDITIONS

Under the rules in 33 CFR 160.215, the owner, agent, master, operator, or person in 

charge must report hazardous conditions to the nearest Coast Guard Marine Safety 

Office or Group Office. Such reports may be made by any means, and no written 

follow up report is required. A “hazardous condition” is defined as any condition 

that can adversely affect a vessel, bridge, structure, or shore area, or degrade the 

environmental quality of any port, harbor, or navigable waterway of the United States. 

Hazardous conditions can include, but are not limited to; collisions, allisions, fire, 

explosions, grounding, leaking, damage, injury or illness of a person aboard, or a 

manning shortage. The intent of hazardous condition reporting is to inform the 

COTP and Group Commander so that appropriate response action can be initiated. 

Hazardous conditions may be caused by marine casualties. Not all hazardous 

conditions, however, result from incidents that the Coast Guard will investigate. 

Accordingly, IOs must consider each hazardous condition report and decide if an 

investigation is warranted; however, the report must be documented in the Marine 

Information for Safety and Law Enforcement (MISLE) data system. 

B.6. THIRD PARTY 

REPORTS

B.6.a. Receiving Third Party Reports 

IOs receive many reports from the public regarding maritime operations. In general, 

IOs should direct callers and visitors to complete a written witness statement.

Written statements may be submitted in any form, including letter, but must identify 

the person making the report, the location of the alleged offense, and the subjects 

(i.e., vessels, facilities, or people) involved. The person filing it must sign and date the 

report, and must understand that (to the extent allowed by the Privacy Act) the 

contents of the report will become a matter of public record. Under exceptional 

circumstances, IOs may document phone conversation with a person making a 

report, and use such a document in lieu of a written report. Anonymous reports are 

not sufficient to establish reasonable cause for the purposes of search and seizure, 

however they are sufficient to initiate a preliminary investigation. 

B.6.b. Review of Third Party Reports prior to 

Investigation 

IOs should review reports thoroughly prior to proceeding beyond the preliminary 

investigation. In many circumstances, the report will not on its face contain an 

incident requiring investigation. Refer to Chapter B7. 

C. ACTIVE SURVEILLANCE / DETECTION OPERATIONS

C.1.

INTRODUCTION

The Marine Investigations Program has historically relied on passive detection 

techniques. Criminal offenses, civil offenses, and some pollution incidents, however, 

are not typically reported to the Coast Guard by the people involved, and IOs cannot 

take a passive approach to detecting these incidents. Accordingly, activities such as 

harbor patrols, enforcement boardings, and sting operations actively search for 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 2: DETECTION OF INCIDENTS

B2-4 

incidents the Coast Guard would not otherwise discover. 

C.2. SURVEILLANCE 

/ DETECTION 

PATROLS

C.2.a. General 

As described in Volume VI of this manual (Ports and Waterways Activities), 

Chapter 1, Coast Guard units conduct multi-mission patrols in the enforcement of 

various laws and regulations, including the detection and investigation of marine 

casualties and pollution incidents. 

C.2.b. Surveillance and Detection in Multi-mission 

Patrols 

The need for surveillance / detection in multi-mission patrols arises from the fact that 

marine incidents continue in our ports despite our prevention activities. Surveillance 

/ detection patrols are aimed at detecting, marine incidents. When an incident has 

been detected, an investigation should immediately be launched.

C.3. CLANDESTINE 

COLLECTION

Some incidents (particularly criminal and civil offenses) leave very little evidence. In 

these cases, the incident can only be detected and investigated while it is ongoing. 

With the authorization of CG-2, it may be possible for IOs to survey maritime 

operations in plain clothes and without identifying themselves. However, these 

operations, while necessary and effective, may create questions on legal authorities 

and possible risk to personnel safety. Before commencing any operations involving 

IOs in plain clothes, commands must consult with their District response and legal 

offices and CG-2 to ensure compliance with guidance on clandestine operations in 

MLEM Chapter 2..E.3.b. Commands must develop in advance a concept of 

operations plan (CONOPS) that outlines the intended activity limits, personnel 

protection concerns, evidence gathering procedures, and anticipated actions if 

violations are detected. CONOPS should reflect that the purpose of the activity is to 

detect ongoing violations of marine safety laws and regulations and for personnel 

protection reasons should ensure that IOs do not reveal themselves or take action 

prior to uniformed Coast Guard personnel or CGIS agents arriving at the scene. 

D. NOTIFICATION FROM OTHER COAST GUARD UNITS

D.1.

NOTIFICATIONS FROM 

THE NATIONAL 

RESPONSE CENTER 

The NRC relays all reports of discharge to the cognizant COTP via MISLE and a 

“flash fax.” These electronic summaries of the discharge report should be treated by 

IOs/PIs as any other notification. Because notifications are not screened for 

duplication at the NRC, units will often receive more than one notification related to 

a single incident. In these cases, the incident will have two or more NRC report 

numbers associated with it. Particular attention must be paid to accounting for each 

and every NRC report (by number) so that the Coast Guard can explain how each 

report was investigated. 

D.2.

NOTIFICATION OF 

When aviation or afloat units encounter pollution, these units usually report the 

observation to the District (m) staff and to the cognizant COTP. Such notifications 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 2: DETECTION OF INCIDENTS

B2-5 

POLLUTION 

OBSERVATION

should be treated as any other report of an incident and should be fully investigated. 

Because these units will typically be unaware of NRC reports there may be duplicate 

notifications. Particular attention must be paid to accounting for each and every 

notification so that the Coast Guard can account for how the report was investigated. 

D.3. SITUATION 

REPORTS 

(SITREPS) 

When significant aviation and/or afloat resources are used during search and rescue 

operations, units may report their involvement and account for resources by sending 

a situation report. IOs should assure that all aviation and afloat units, groups, and 

small boat stations copy them on all SAR SITREPs. IOs should, at a minimum, 

screen these SITREPs daily for incidents they may not have detected through other 

means. Because the threshold for Coast Guard investigative action varies, IOs should 

communicate closely with SAR units to convey investigation program information 

needs. With close relationships in mind, IOs should have the information needed to 

assess possible incidents from the SITREP. 

D.4. CASUALTY 

REPORTS 

(CASREPS) 

Coast Guard cutters, Navy vessels, and vessels under contract to or operated by the 

Military Sealift Command send CASREPs when an accident occurs or when a piece 

of important equipment fails. IOs should carefully screen all CASREPs, keeping in 

mind that MSC vessels may use the CASREP as the primary means of notification for 

a marine casualty. The Coast Guard will investigate all pollution incidents aboard (via 

MOU) Navy and Coast Guard vessels. NOTE: the Coast Guard does not take 

enforcement action against Navy or Coast Guard vessels.

D.5. OPERATIONS 

SUMMARIES 

(OPSUMS) 

While SAR units send many SITREPs, not all incidents (or responses) warrant a 

SITREP. In these cases, the only mention may come in the Group or District SAR 

Controller’s daily OPSUM. IOs should maintain a close relationship with District 

and Group Command Centers, assuring they receive copies of the OPSUM each day. 

IOs should review the OPSUM each morning for cases of which they may have 

otherwise been unaware. Similarly, because OPSUMs are reviewed by headquarters 

program managers, IOs should present their most significant efforts in the daily 

OPSUM for the district. 

E. REPORTS FROM OTHER LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES

E.1. GENERAL IOs shall maintain a close relationship with other law enforcement agencies for a 

number of reasons. These agencies, for instance, may be involved in investigating 

incidents that the Coast Guard also investigates. Such contingencies should be 

considered, and where possible, a MOU between the local unit and the law 

enforcement agency should describe what incidents will be jointly investigated, which 

agency will take the lead in which investigations, how criminal referrals will be made, 

and how reports of investigation (ROIs) will be drafted, approved, and released. 

These MOUs should also consider which types of incidents the Coast Guard and 

other agencies will notify one another of. In units with large AOR’s, the IO will (by 

necessity) rely on these agencies for notifications regarding incidents, particularly 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 2: DETECTION OF INCIDENTS

B2-6 

pollution incidents. 

E.2. HANDLING OF 

REPORTS

Reports from other law enforcement agencies should be treated as any other 

notification regarding an incident. As such, the Coast Guard’s action regarding the 

incident must be determined by weighing the severity of the incident against other 

priorities, including workload. Reports from other law enforcement agencies, 

however, should be treated with greater confidence than reports from other sources. 

Accordingly, less verification and validation needs to be done by IO's. 

E.3. MULTIINCIDENT 

INVESTIGATION

In many instances, law enforcement agencies show more interest in a pattern of law 

breaking or a pattern of incidents than in a single, isolated incident. Accordingly, IOs 

should be sensitive to the law enforcement agency’s investigation of a pattern of 

behavior, and should not force an isolated incident investigation to closure when 

other law enforcement agencies intend to investigate as part of a pattern of offenses. 

F. REPORTS FROM FOREIGN GOVERNMENTS AND THE 

INTERNATIONAL MARITIME ORGANIZATION (IMO) 

F.1. GENERAL The Office of Investigations and Analysis, Commandant (CG-545) acts as the point 

of contact for the international community under the terms of the International Code 

for the Investigation of Marine Casualties and Incidents. Under the code, certain 

incidents should be referred to the flag administration for its action. When incidents 

occur aboard U.S. vessels in foreign waters, CG-545 receives referrals from other 

nations, and occasionally from the IMO. 

F.2. REPORTS 

FROM FOREIGN 

GOVERNMENTS

Depending upon the nature of their encounter and their domestic laws, foreign 

governments may refer a nearly completed case or a simple notification. While each 

reported incident must be weighed against existing workload when considering what 

investigative action to take, units should weigh cases referred by foreign governments 

as more serious because Coast Guard action bears on the United States’ international 

reputation. In many cases, the Coast Guard will communicate with the Department 

of State in reporting what action we have taken. Evidence, interviews, and anything 

else collected by foreign governments may be used by IOs. 
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
USCG Marine Safety Manual 

Volume V: Investigations and Enforcement

PART B: INVESTIGATION 

Chapter Three: 

Fact-Finding 

And 

Evidence Handling
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 3: FACT FINDING AND EVIDENCE HANDLING

B3-i 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

A. OVERVIEW .................................. 1

A.1. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................................................1

A.2. ANALYSIS DURING FACT FINDING ...................................................................................................................................1

A.3. SCOPE OF FACT FINDING..................................................................................................................................................1

B. OPERATIONAL THREAT ASSESSMENT ................. 1

B.1. INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................................................................................1

B.2. EVALUATIONS ..................................................................................................................................................................1

B.3. THREATS FROM UNKNOWN SUBSTANCES.........................................................................................................................2

C. SECURING THE SCENE .......................... 2

C.1. INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................................................................................2

C.2. SECURING THE INCIDENT SCENE ......................................................................................................................................2

C.3. READINESS.......................................................................................................................................................................2

C.4. INTRODUCTIONS UPON ARRIVAL.......................................................................................................................................2

C.6. POTENTIAL WITNESSES ....................................................................................................................................................3

C.6.a. General.....................................................................................................................................................................3

C.6.b. Order of Interviews..................................................................................................................................................3

C.7. DRUG AND ALCOHOL TESTING.........................................................................................................................................3

C.7.a. General.....................................................................................................................................................................3

C.7.b. Authority to Direct Testing under 46 CFR parts 4 and 16.......................................................................................3

C.7.c. Authority to Direct Testing under 33 CFR part 95...................................................................................................3

C.7.d. Individuals to be Tested............................................................................................................................................4

C.8. SECURING RECORDS.........................................................................................................................................................4

C.8.a. General.....................................................................................................................................................................4

D. THE “SHEL ” MODEL ......................... 4

D.1. GENERAL .........................................................................................................................................................................4

D.2. GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION OF SHEL..............................................................................................................................1

D.3. CENTRAL COMPONENT OF SHEL.....................................................................................................................................1

D.4. PHYSICAL FACTORS .........................................................................................................................................................1

D.5. PHYSIOLOGICAL FACTORS ...............................................................................................................................................2

D.6. PSYCHOLOGICAL FACTORS ..............................................................................................................................................3

D.7. PSYCHOSOCIAL FACTORS.................................................................................................................................................4

D.8. MISMATCHES BETWEEN COMPONENTS............................................................................................................................5

D.9. PERSON TO PERSON (LIVEWARE-LIVEWARE) MISMATCHES .............................................................................................5

D.10. PERSON TO POLICY (LIVEWARE-SOFTWARE) MISMATCHES............................................................................................6

D.11. PERSON TO EQUIPMENT (LIVEWARE-HARDWARE) MISMATCHES ...................................................................................6

D.12. PERSON TO ENVIRONMENT (LIVEWARE-ENVIRONMENT) MISMATCHES..........................................................................7

D.13. USING SHEL IN COMPLEX SYSTEMS..............................................................................................................................7

D.14. USING SHEL TO GUIDE FACT-FINDING .........................................................................................................................7

D.15. ORDER OF TOPICS IN THE INTERVIEW.............................................................................................................................8

E. INSPECTING THE INCIDENT SCENE ................. 9

E.1. GENERAL..........................................................................................................................................................................9

E.2. INSPECTIONS AND SEARCHES ...........................................................................................................................................9
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 3: FACT FINDING AND EVIDENCE HANDLING

B3-ii 

E.2.a. Inspection during the Course of an Investigation.....................................................................................................9

E.2.b. Reasonableness in the Scope of the Inspection.........................................................................................................9

E.2.c. Proper Inspections....................................................................................................................................................9

E.2.d. Evidence of Criminal Activity...................................................................................................................................9

F. EVIDENCE ................................. 10

F.1. GENERAL........................................................................................................................................................................10

F.2. WHEN CONTROL OF EVIDENCE IS REQUIRED..................................................................................................................10

F.2.a. General...................................................................................................................................................................10

F.2.b. Transfer of Custody ................................................................................................................................................10

F.3. CONTROL FOR LATER IDENTIFICATION...........................................................................................................................10

F.4. IDENTIFYING EVIDENCE..................................................................................................................................................11

F.4.a. Process for Identifying Evidence............................................................................................................................11

F.4.b. Tagging of Physical Evidence ................................................................................................................................11

F.4.c. Evidence Control Number (ECN)...........................................................................................................................11

F.5. COPYING DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE..............................................................................................................................11

F.6. SELECTING WHICH EVIDENCE TO TAKE .........................................................................................................................11

G. PHYSICAL EVIDENCE .......................... 12

G.1. GENERAL .......................................................................................................................................................................12

G.2. AUTHORITY TO COLLECT AND RETAIN PHYSICAL EVIDENCE ........................................................................................12

G.3. RETENTION OF ORIGINAL RECORDS / DOCUMENTS ON BOARD SHIPS.............................................................................12

G.3.a. General ..................................................................................................................................................................12

G.3.b. Certified Copies.....................................................................................................................................................12

G.4. ISSUING SUBPOENAS TO COMPEL THE PRODUCTION OF PHYSICAL EVIDENCE................................................................12

G.4.a. General ..................................................................................................................................................................12

G.4.b. Subpoenas for Cooperative Custodians of Evidence .............................................................................................13

G.5. VIDEO AND AUDIO TAPE................................................................................................................................................13

G.5.a. General ..................................................................................................................................................................13

G.5.b. When Permitted......................................................................................................................................................13

G.5.c. Concealed Recording Devices................................................................................................................................13

G.5.d. Individual Audio/Video Tapes................................................................................................................................13

G.6. PHOTOGRAPHS ...............................................................................................................................................................14

G.7. ELECTRONIC RECORDS ..................................................................................................................................................14

G.7.a. General ..................................................................................................................................................................14

G.7.b. Divers and ROV’s..................................................................................................................................................14

G.8. OTHER PHYSICAL EVIDENCE ..........................................................................................................................................15

H. DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE ....................... 15

H.1. INTRODUCTION ..............................................................................................................................................................15

H.2. PHOTOCOPIES.................................................................................................................................................................15

H.3. EXTRACTS......................................................................................................................................................................15

H.4. SHIPPING ARTICLES .......................................................................................................................................................15

H.5. OFFICIAL LOG BOOKS ....................................................................................................................................................15

H.6. OTHER DOCUMENTS ......................................................................................................................................................16

H.7. AUTOMATION RECORDS.................................................................................................................................................17

H.8. COMPANY RECORDS AND POLICIES ...............................................................................................................................17

I. ORAL EVIDENCE ............................. 17

I.1. GENERAL.........................................................................................................................................................................17

I.2. ON-SITE WITNESSES ........................................................................................................................................................18
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 3: FACT FINDING AND EVIDENCE HANDLING

B3-iii 

I.3. OFF-SITE WITNESSES.......................................................................................................................................................18

I.4. SCOPE OF INTERVIEWS.....................................................................................................................................................19

I.5. PREPARATION FOR INTERVIEWS ......................................................................................................................................19

I.5.a. General....................................................................................................................................................................19

I.5.b. Background Information..........................................................................................................................................19

I.6. PRELIMINARY WITNESS STATEMENTS .............................................................................................................................20

I.7. CONDUCTING THE INTERVIEW .........................................................................................................................................20

I.7.a. Introductions............................................................................................................................................................20

I.7.b. Manner of the Interview ..........................................................................................................................................20

I.7.c. Number of Interviewers ...........................................................................................................................................20

I.7.d. Suspicion of Criminal Activity .................................................................................................................................20

I.8. COOPERATION OF WITNESSES .........................................................................................................................................21

I.8.a. Refusal of Witnesses to Testify.................................................................................................................................21

I.8.b. Applicability of the Fifth Amendment......................................................................................................................21

I.8.c. Compelling Testimony .............................................................................................................................................21

I.9. DOCUMENTING THE INTERVIEW ......................................................................................................................................21

I.9.a. Transcription ...........................................................................................................................................................21

I.9.b. Written Statements...................................................................................................................................................22

I.9.b.1. Format of Written Statements...............................................................................................................................22

I.9.b.2. Contents of Written Statements.............................................................................................................................22

I.9.b.3. Refusal to Sign Written Statements.......................................................................................................................22

I.9.c. Letter in Lieu of a Statement....................................................................................................................................23

I.10. INVESTIGATING OFFICER’S NOTES ON THE INTERVIEW .................................................................................................23

J. OTHER INFORMATION .......................... 23

J.1. JOB AIDS AND QUESTIONNAIRES.....................................................................................................................................23

J.2. POST CASUALTY DRUG AND ALCOHOL TESTING ............................................................................................................23

J.3. 96 HOUR WORK/REST HISTORY......................................................................................................................................23
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 3: FACT FINDING AND EVIDENCE HANDLING

B3-1 

A.1.

INTRODUCTION

The method for fact-finding while conducting an investigation includes, but is not 

necessarily limited to the following steps: 

• Step One: Inspecting the location; 

• Step Two: Gathering and recording physical evidence; 

• Step Three: Interviewing witnesses taking into account cultural and 

 languages differences (on site and external); 

• Step Four: Reviewing documents, procedures, and records; 

• Step Five: Identifying conflicts in evidence; identifying missing 

 evidence; and 

A.2. ANALYSIS 

DURING FACT 

FINDING

A.3. SCOPE OF 

FACT FINDING

B.1.

INTRODUCTION

B.2. EVALUATIONS

A. OVERVIEW

• Step Six: Conducting specialized studies. 

During the initial stages of every investigation, IOs should aim to gather and record 

all the facts that may assist in determining causes. IOs should be aware of the 

dangers of reaching conclusions too early, thereby failing to keep an open mind and 

consider the full range of possibilities. It is essential that the fact-finding step of the 

investigation process be kept separate from the analysis of the collected evidence 

leading to conclusions and recommendations. 

The objective of the fact finding step of the investigation is to collect as many facts as 

possible which assist in understanding the incident and the events surrounding it. 

The scope of any investigation can be divided into four areas: people, environment, 

equipment, and procedures. Additionally, all casualty investigations will at a 

minimum cover the information required for reporting to the International Maritime 

Organization (IMO). 

B. OPERATIONAL THREAT ASSESSMENT

As required by Volume 1, Chapter 10 of this manual, all field units must have safe 

work practices (SWPs) that explain how to handle the various hazards likely 

encountered while performing Coast Guard missions. In practice, many field 

personnel do not consider all the hazards actually present during an investigation, and 

accordingly do not consider using the protective measures in the SWPs. To use the 

SWPs appropriately, field personnel must evaluate with each and every on-scene 

deployment which hazards are present, and what measures they will take to protect 

themselves. Whenever IOs and their teams go on-scene during an investigation, they 

must consciously consider and plan how they will handle hazards prior to deploying. 

This is called an Operational Threat Assessment. 

IOs should consciously consider each of the specific hazards listed in this section. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 3: FACT FINDING AND EVIDENCE HANDLING

B.3. THREATS 

FROM UNKNOWN 

SUBSTANCES

C.1.

INTRODUCTION

C.2. SECURING 

THE INCIDENT SCENE

C.3. READINESS

C.4.

INTRODUCTIONS UPON 

ARRIVAL

Specific SWPs may list acceptable levels of risk for each unit, but in general, the IO 

should consider their evaluation in terms of a simple metaphor: a traffic light. For 

each situation, the threat is either: (green) not present or at acceptable risk levels; 

(yellow) present, but acceptable with defenses; or (red) unacceptable even with 

defenses. When an IO categorizes any hazard as red, they should not enter the “hot” 

zone where that hazard is present, and should not allow their personnel to enter the 

hot zone. 

In many situations, the IO responding to a marine incident such as an oil spill may 

not know precisely what hazards are present on-scene. An unknown substance 

believed to be oil, for instance, may contain PCBs or other unusual hazards. In the 

vast majority of responses to unknown substance discharges, the spill is oil, and no 

such hazards are present. Similarly, be aware that even when a substance is 

reasonably believed to be oil, the IO may not know whether benzene is still likely 

present in the oil (for benzene containing oils, this depends on a variety of factors, 

including age of the oil). 

C. SECURING THE SCENE

An investigation should be carried out as soon as possible after an incident. The 

quality of evidence, particularly that relying on the accuracy of human recollection, 

can deteriorate rapidly with time, and delayed investigations are usually not as 

conclusive as those performed promptly. 

Where possible, the site of the occurrence should be left unchanged until the 

investigation team has inspected it. Where this is not possible, for instance to make 

essential and immediate repairs following serious structural damage, the scene should 

be documented by photographs, audio visual recordings, sketches or any other 

relevant means available with the object of preserving vital evidence and possibly 

recreating the circumstances at a later date. Of importance is the recording of the 

positions of individuals at the site, the condition and position of equipment (and 

controls), supervisory instructions, work permits, and recording charts. Damaged or 

failed components should be kept in a secure location to await the arrival of the 

investigative team who may require detailed scientific examination of certain objects. 

IOs should be prepared to proceed directly to the scene of an incident to secure the 

scene and obtain timely interviews of witnesses. Material such as subpoenas, paper, 

pens, statement forms, recording devices, and tapes normally used in investigations 

should be readily available. 

When first boarding a vessel or entering a facility, the IO should report his or her 

presence to the master, senior deck officer, or person in charge and present their 

badge and credentials. The IO should further inform the master, senior deck officer, 

B3-2 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 3: FACT FINDING AND EVIDENCE HANDLING

B3-3 

C.6. POTENTIAL 

WITNESSES

C.6.a. General 

C.6.b. Order of Interviews 

C.7. DRUG AND 

ALCOHOL TESTING

C.7.a. General 

C.7.b. Authority to Direct Testing under 46 CFR parts 

4 and 16 

C.7.c. Authority to Direct Testing under 33 CFR part 

95 

or person in charge what must be done in order to secure the incident scene. 

IOs should ensure that all potential witnesses are asked not to discuss the incident 

with one another before being interviewed. They should be separated if possible. 

Witnesses’ recollections may be changed or influenced by others, and IOs should 

recognize that different witnesses normally recall the same event slightly differently. 

If all testimony regarding an incident is precisely the same, the IO should consider 

the possibility that the witnesses have interacted sufficiently to alter their testimony. 

See also 46 USC Section 6303. 

The order of interviews will depend upon the manner in which the facts are 

developed and the accessibility of witnesses. Witnesses should be interviewed as 

soon after the incident as possible. It is generally best to interview witnesses who 

have the most complete overview of the incident first. This would be the Master, 

Chief Engineer, or person in charge. Also, those witnesses who will not forewarn the 

potential subject of an investigation should be interviewed before those who might 

reasonably be expected to inform the potential subject. In this manner facts and 

information are obtained that can be used in detecting inconsistencies or attempts to 

mislead on the part of witnesses who may be unsympathetic to the investigation. 

46 CFR 4.06 and 16.240 require that marine employers conduct drug and alcohol 

testing on mariners directly involved in a serious marine incident. Drug and alcohol 

testing should be done as soon as practicable within the 2-hour time limit. While the 

burden for drug and alcohol testing rests on the marine employer, IOs shall remind 

mariners and marine employers of their drug and alcohol testing responsibilities while 

securing the casualty scene. 

46 CFR 4.06 requires marine employers to take all practicable steps to test individuals 

involved in a serious marine incident for evidence of drug and alcohol use as soon as 

possible after addressing the resulting safety concerns delineated in 46 CFR 4.06-1(e). 

46 CFR 4.06-1(c) allows law enforcement officers (not necessarily federal) to 

determine that additional personnel are directly involved in the incident, and thus 

must undergo drug testing. 46 CFR 16.250 requires Marine employers to require 

drug and alcohol testing when they have probable cause to believe a mariner is under 

the influence of drugs or alcohol. Whether designated by the marine employer or a 

law enforcement officer, drug testing under these authorities is the responsibility of 

marine employer, not the Coast Guard. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 3: FACT FINDING AND EVIDENCE HANDLING

B3-4 

33 CFR 95.035 authorizes the chemical testing of individuals suspected of being 

intoxicated or directly involved in the occurrence of a marine casualty. Chemical tests 

should be directed whenever an individual appears to be intoxicated. Unlike 

mandatory chemical testing after a serious marine incident, chemical tests are not 

automatically required whenever an individual is involved in a marine casualty. Good 

judgment and careful consideration of the seriousness and circumstances of a marine 

casualty should be exercised before directing drug testing under 33 CFR 95.035. 

C.7.d. Individuals to be Tested 

C.8. SECURING 

RECORDS

C.8.a. General 

When securing the scene of an incident, IOs should pay particular attention to timely 

securing of records that may, in some cases, be destroyed or erased. Many electronic 

records (ARPA playback, voyage recorders, etc.) will automatically be lost after some 

period of time, generally a few hours. Similarly, IOs should consider securing the 

Chief Mate’s office, where many records (including rough logs and cargo records) will 

be kept. Most deck and engine officers keep rough notes, which may be the only 

records available because smooth log entries are not foremost in a mariner’s priorities 

following an incident. 

D.1. GENERAL The SHEL model is a tool used to collect the factual information necessary to fill in 

the timeline. The SHEL model was developed by Elwin Edwards and refined by 

NOTE: The standard of intoxication is defined in 33 CFR 95.020 as: 1) an alcohol 

concentration of 0.08 percent by weight or more in their blood for recreational 

vessels, 2) an alcohol concentration of 0.04 percent by weight or more in their blood 

for vessels other than recreational vessels, and 3) the effect of intoxicants consumed 

by the individual on the person’s manner, disposition, speech, muscular movement, 

general appearance or behavior is apparent by observation for any vessel. 33 CFR 

95.010 defines an intoxicant as any form of alcohol, drug, or combination thereof. 

Under the post-casualty drug and alcohol testing regulations in 46 CFR 4.06, law 

enforcement officers may designate personnel as “directly involved” in a serious 

marine incident (as defined by 46 CFR 4.03-4), and therefore subject them to 

mandatory automatic drug testing. The personnel who can be designated as directly 

involved in the incident are limited to those actually aboard the vessel. This 

restriction is stipulated in 46 CFR 4.06-1(b) and 4.06-5(a) by the phrase “any 

individual engaged or employed on board a vessel...” Given this restriction, it is not 

feasible for the marine employer or law enforcement officer to extend the drug and 

alcohol testing requirements to someone who was not actually aboard the vessel such 

as a dispatcher, drawbridge tender, or barge supervisor issuing orders to a vessel 

master/operator. 

D. THE “SHEL ” MODEL
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 3: FACT FINDING AND EVIDENCE HANDLING

B3-5 

Captain Frank Hawkins as an investigation tool. It allows a marine investigator to 

explore the interaction of the many operational parts of the maritime transportation 

system. The model effectively moves the focus from the individual (mariner) to the 

system. Rather than focusing on any single element in the system, it assumes that any 

failure in the system results from a mismatch between two or more of its 

components. The IMO has suggested the SHEL model as a means for exploring the 

interaction of all parts of the maritime transportation system in an accident, and the 

Coast Guard has adopted it as the principal means of conducting on-scene factfinding. The SHEL Model is a categorization of the various conditions that the 

marine investigator may wish to record. The SHEL model suggests that all of the 

operational elements of the maritime transportation system belong to one of four 

categories. Accordingly, the marine investigator should observe the condition of the 

various elements in those four categories. These categories are simply: 

 Software: The information and support systems guiding people. Software 

elements include checklists, manuals, publications, procedures, regulatory 

requirements, training, education, maps, and charts. 

 Hardware: The vessels, facilities, machinery, cargo, equipment, and 

material people work with. Hardware elements include all machinery, gear, 

electronics, switches, controls, and displays. 

 Environment: The internal and marine environment in which people 

work. Environment elements include the internal environment such as 

workplace environment, room temperature, ventilation, lighting, pitching and 

yawing, and the marine environment such as sea state, wind, ice, precipitation, 

and visibility. 

Liveware: The people themselves. Liveware elements include all of the people 

involved in the accident both directly and indirectly. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 3: FACT FINDING AND EVIDENCE HANDLING

D.2. GRAPHIC 

REPRESENTATION OF 

SHEL 

In this diagram: 

S is Software, 

H is Hardware 

E is Environment 

L is Liveware 

D.3. CENTRAL 

COMPONENT OF SHEL 

• physical factors (height, weight, strength, etc.); 

• physiological factors (health, drug and alcohol use, fatigue, etc.); 

• psychological factors (personality, attitude, biases, etc.); and 

• psychosocial factors (personal relationships, money problems, etc.). 

When collecting information about an accident, marine investigators should limit 

their in-depth examination to those people who were directly involved in the 

accident. Pursuant to the rules in 46 CFR Part 4, post-casualty drug and alcohol 

testing should be performed on people directly involved in a marine casualty, when 

required. Similarly, a 96-hour work/rest history should always be gathered for that 

person as well. The lists below contain the various areas of examination of liveware. 

The lists are not exhaustive. 

D.4. PHYSICAL 

FACTORS

Physical Capability. The physical capability of the individual to perform required 

actions and movements. Consider: 

• Age 

• Height 

Sensory Limitations. The sensory limitations of the individual that may affect the 

person’s performance. Consider: 

The SHEL model is typically depicted graphically to display not only the four 

categories or components of the maritime transportation system, but also the 

relationships or “interfaces” between the elements and the people (liveware) at the 

heart of the model. 

The central component of the SHEL model is a person. That person interacts with 

the other components of the maritime transportation system, and is influenced by 

mismatches in those interactions. The person is also influenced, however, by factors 

entirely within themselves that they bring into the maritime transportation system. 

Such factors to be explored in using the SHEL model include: 

• Strength 

L E

H

S

L

B3-1 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 3: FACT FINDING AND EVIDENCE HANDLING

B3-2 

• Visual limitations. Visual limitations can cause illusions and disorientation, or 

impair reading of instruments and charts. Examples of visual limitations are: 

color blindness, visual acuity, depth perception, and requirement for glasses 

or contact lenses. 

• Hearing limitations. Hearing limitations on the part of the individual can 

leave an individual unaware of faint sounds or sounds in a specific affected 

hearing range. This factor refers to the individual’s capability, not to ambient 

noise or environmental conditions. 

• Smell limitations. 

• Touch limitations. 

D.5.

PHYSIOLOGICAL 

FACTORS

Nutrition Factors. Nutrition potentially affects an individual’s ability to respond to 

action or resist fatigue. Consider: 

• Time since last meal 

• Food intake during last 24 hours 

• Recent weight loss 

• Recent dieting 

Health Factors. Health factor can directly affect performance. Consider: 

• Diseases 

• Pains 

• Dental conditions 

• Pregnancy 

• Obesity 

• Recent blood donation 

• Smoking (reduces dexterity, impairs vision, & affects judgement of time) 

• Alcohol/drugs (over-the-counter medication, prescribed medication, coffee, 

illegal drugs, alcohol abuse, etc.) 

Fatigue. Consider: 

• Short Term Fatigue. Short-term fatigue can be influenced by the amount of

sleep, duration or work period, and the nature of tasks, among other factors. 

• Long Term (Chronic) Fatigue. Long term fatigue may depend on work 

schedule, ability to cope with stress, and sleeping patterns. (Known effects of 

stress include an impact on short-term memory, concentration, ability to 

make decisions, risk taking, and taking “short cuts.”) 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 3: FACT FINDING AND EVIDENCE HANDLING

B3-3 

Illusions. Illusions can be induced by the environment, and include: 

• Environmental Illusions, such as “black hole,” flicker vertigo, and circular or 

linear vection. 

• Vestibular Illusions can include somatogyral (the leans) or somatogravic 

(coriolis). 

D.6.

PSYCHOLOGICAL 

FACTORS

Information Processing. Factors to consider include the possibility that the 

amount of information to be processed exceeded the individual’s own limitations 

(mental capacity) leading to poor judgment. 

Perceptions. Factors to consider include delayed perceptions, inaccurate perception 

(mental picture) of the task to be performed, leading to slow reaction or wrong 

reactions. 

Attention. Attention factors consider that the level of attention required during a 

task may exceed the individual’s own limitations. Consider: 

• Attention span 

• Fixation 

• Distraction 

Workload. Workload and its perceived level can be increased through an operator’s 

or crew’s own actions, causing stress, panic, incorrect prioritization of tasks, and loss 

of situational awareness. 

Attitudes. The attitudes of individuals toward their work, mission, others, and 

themselves can affect performance. Consider: 

• Boredom 

• Overconfidence 

• “Press on – itis” 

Mental / Emotional State. The mental or emotional state of a person influences 

their approach to situations and can influence their ability to respond in an 

emergency. These factors may appear as signs of panic, stress, and anxiety including 

fixation, gazing, and very slow reaction times. Consider: 

• Apprehension / fear 

• Arousal level

Personality Traits. Personality traits may predispose an individual to a certain 

response pattern in a given situation. Through interviews with co-workers and 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 3: FACT FINDING AND EVIDENCE HANDLING

B3-4 

friends, investigators can identify such characteristics as: 

• Hostility 

• Excitability 

• Impulsiveness 

• “Macho-ness” 

Experience / Recency. Experience and recency include attention to the suitability 

of a person’s experience, and the recency of that experience, to the situation.

Consider: 

• The person’s overall experience 

• The person’s recent experience 

• The person’s experience on a particular type of equipment 

• The person’s experience with a particular procedure 

Training. Consider: 

• The type of training the person has received 

• Indications of positive or negative transfer (did they get the message?) 

• Weaknesses observed during training 

Planning. The planning of an operation, but prior to and during the operation can 

reflect the operator’s or management’s attitudes. Limited planning can result in 

incomplete information, biasing decision-making, and bad judgment. 

D.7.

PSYCHOSOCIAL 

FACTORS

Psychosocial factors have an important role as they influence an individual’s 

approach to a situation and their ability to handles stress, as well as the degree of 

fatigue experienced. Consider any event from a person’s social environment that is 

important enough to negatively influence behaviors or create stress. To evaluate the 

pressure and stress levels experienced by a person, compare the individual’s 

perception of events against the perceptions of others. Consider whether any of the 

following may be relevant: 

• Friends 

• Family 

• Interpersonal conflicts 

Knowledge. A person’s knowledge about equipment, systems, procedures, or the 

environment may be inadequate, resulting in reduced confidence, confusion, or 

inappropriate actions. 

• Peers 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 3: FACT FINDING AND EVIDENCE HANDLING

B3-5 

• Cultural differences 

• Personal loss (grief, shock, stress) 

• Money / financial problems 

• Activities 

• Life style 

• Work 

D.8. MISMATCHES 

BETWEEN COMPONENTS

The rough edges between the components in the SHEL diagram are symbolic of the 

fact that the mismatch between an individual and these components is important. 

These possible mismatches warrant special attention by the marine investigator 

because mismatches in the system may point out safety deficiencies. Examples of 

mismatches between a person and other components include: 

 Person to Policy & Procedures (liveware-software) Mismatches: 

Mismatches between liveware and software include problems in the transfer of 

information between support systems and the person. Outdated publications, for 

instance, generate a mismatch by giving the person incorrect information. 

 Person to Equipment & Gear (liveware-hardware) Mismatches: Mismatches 

between liveware and hardware include problems in the physical and mental 

interaction of people and machines. Design limitations, instrument/control 

design and location, instrument controls and readability, seat design, proper 

guards and protections and other ergonomic issues are instances of these 

mismatches.

 Person to Environment (liveware-environment) Mismatches. Mismatches 

between people and environment are facts that affect human performance. For 

example temperature, humidity, illumination or glare, ambient noise, vibration, air 

quality, external visibility, pitch and yaw each have an effect on a person’s ability 

to perform his or her task optimally. 

The following lists (D9-D12) contain the various areas of examination of 

mismatches. The lists are not exhaustive. 

D.9. PERSON TO 

PERSON (LIVEWARELIVEWARE)

Oral Communication. Tapes and witness interviews can help identify 

misinterpretations, misunderstandings, and improper language use. Consider: 

 Person to Person (liveware-liveware) Mismatches. Mismatches between 

people and other people include voice communications, working language, 

phraseology, speech rate, readback/hearback, briefings, personal interactions,

crew coordination, and non-verbal ques such as hand signals. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 3: FACT FINDING AND EVIDENCE HANDLING

B3-6 

MISMATCHES • Noise interference 

• Content and rate of speech 

• Readback/hearback procedures for oral instructions 

• Visual signals that replace, support, or contradict oral or other information. 

Examples include confusing body language, or other non-verbal cues. 

Crew Interaction. Crew interaction includes crew compatibility in terms of 

personality, experience level, and working habits. These factors can cause people to 

work for or against each other, or fail to use all available resources. 

Worker – Management Factors. Consider: 

• The level where decisions and plans are formulated 

• The level were resources are allocated

• The supervisory level were actions are monitored and instructions followed 

• The influence of management policies on personnel issues (perhaps causing 

excessive workload or unhealthy work environments) 

Supervision Factors. Supervision factors include the existence, availability, and 

currency of standards, policies, and quality controls, as well as supervisory presence 

(or absence), monitoring, style, etc. 

D.10. PERSON TO 

POLICY (LIVEWARESOFTWARE)

MISMATCHES

Written Information. Consider the format, content, and/or vocabulary of manuals, 

checklists, or any other written documents. 

Computers. Consider the compatibility of keyboards or displays, their impact on 

workload, and inducement of confusion, increased reaction time, task fixation, or 

blatant errors. 

Automation. Consider the effect of automated equipment or procedures on a 

person’s attitude toward their work, mental picture of the mission, an impact on 

workload at a critical time. 

D.11. PERSON TO 

EQUIPMENT 

(LIVEWARE- HARDWARE)

MISMATCHES

Switches, Controls, and Displays. Similarities, differences, and peculiarities 

between different systems’ switches, controls, and displays may affect an individual’s 

information processing characteristics. Consider: 

• The influence of design, location, and colors 

Passenger Interaction. Like crew interactions, passenger interaction occasionally 

influences the performance of individuals. Passengers can provide information on 

crew actions, attitudes, and behaviors. 

Labor Relations. Labor relations include, for instance, union influence on workers, 

management, policies, and work habits; post-merger negotiations, etc. 

Regulatory Requirements. Consider the individual’s essential qualifications and 

certifications for the task, e.g. current licenses or ratings, qualifications for equipment 

type, infraction history, etc. 

• Influence of volume of information presented, and the instruments, displays, 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 3: FACT FINDING AND EVIDENCE HANDLING

• Suitability of equipment 

• Condition of equipment 

D.12. PERSON TO 

ENVIRONMENT 

(LIVEWAREENVIRONMENT)

MISMATCHES

Internal Environment. Consider the climate, personal comfort, workplace 

environment and physical working conditions. 

Marine Environment. Consider the weather, sea state, tides, currents, visibility 

conditions, precipitation, and rate of change in weather conditions. 

Infrastructure. Consider the infrastructure or support services and their contribution 

toward reducing safety margins, or limiting choices of action, maintenance being one 

of the key facilities affecting an occurrence. 

D.13. USING 

SHEL IN COMPLEX 

SYSTEMS

Complex systems often contain many people. The SHEL model can be used to 

organize information (and guide fact-finding) by considering that people interact with 

several people, each of them may interact with several more people. Accordingly, in 

complex systems the SHEL model can be represented with multiple people: 

In this diagram, each person (each member 

vessels and a VTS operator) should be 

represented as the “center” of a SHEL 

D.14. USING 

SHEL TO GUIDE 

FACT-FINDING

In a practical sense, the number of possible SHEL components affecting each person 

involved in a marine casualty is very large. If a marine investigator were to describe 

each possible element of the marine transportation system in detail and then to 

comprehensively rule out every possible mismatch, the process of conducting factfinding would be exhausting. Accordingly, the marine investigator should consider 

the four principal components in the general sense, and should inquire exhaustively 

into only those areas that are immediately relevant to the accident. Questions about a 

person’s marital status, for instance, are not appropriate when a person’s performance 

is either a) tangential to the accident; or b) not in question (i.e., they did nothing 

wrong). Generally, information about the other conditions (weather and sea state, 

vessel characteristics, names of people involved and their roles) should be collected 

controls, and switches themselves, on reaction time, workload, confusion, 

information overload, .etc. 

of the bridge crew, or the operator of two 

diagram, each interacting with the others. 

L E

H

S

L E

H

S

L E

H

S

B3-7 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 3: FACT FINDING AND EVIDENCE HANDLING

first. 

D.15. ORDER OF 

TOPICS IN THE 

INTERVIEW

• A list of who was involved in the accident, who was talking with whom, and

so on (Liveware to Liveware interactions). 

• A list of what equipment was in operation, its condition (Hardware) 

Once the outlines of the SHEL model for that person have been established, the 

marine investigator will proceed “around the diagram” once again, this time focusing 

on the interactions. Such questions are slightly more uncomfortable, but build on 

previous discussion. For example, these questions might include: 

• A discussion of how well the bridge team got along (Liveware to Liveware 

Mismatch) 

• Whether the Ship’s ISM policies were actually read, or just a paperwork drill 

(Software to Liveware Mismatch) 

Finally, the marine investigator proceeds into the most uncomfortable aspects of the 

interview: the factors affecting the witness themselves. Recognizing that people may 

act to protect their own self-image and/or to hide matters from the investigation, 

marine investigators should carefully corroborate information provided by a witness 

pertaining to themselves. Generally, the majority of this information about a person 

is derived from interviews with other people. For example questions might include: 

• “Did you receive a bonus for reducing the ship’s maintenance expenditures?” 

(Psychosocial Factors) 

• “Do you have problems seeing with your glasses off? Were you wearing 

them?” (Physical Factors) 

• “How were you handling all off those radar contacts at the same time?” 

(Psychological Factors) 

Marine investigators should remember that extreme care should be used in 

establishing a rapport with the witness. This involves gradually easing into 

discussions of subjects most uncomfortable for the witness. Accordingly, following 

the gathering of basic personal information, marine investigators should begin the 

interview by obtaining descriptions of the SHEL components involved. Such

descriptions might include: 

• What policies and guidance were in effect, what charts were being used, etc. 

(Software) 

• How well the pilot could see from the starboard radar (Hardware to Liveware 

Mismatch) 

• “I have to ask: were you using drugs or alcohol?” (Physiological Factors) 

L

E

H

S

L

B3-8 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 3: FACT FINDING AND EVIDENCE HANDLING

B3-9 

Once these topics have been adequately discussed, the marine investigator should 

then turn his or her attention to the mismatches in their interaction. These 

E. INSPECTING THE INCIDENT SCENE

E.1. GENERAL

E.2.a. Inspection during the Course of an 

Investigation 

The Coast Guard has authority to enforce environmental and safety regulations and, 

as such have legitimate access to ships and facilities governed by these regulations. 

Coast Guard regulations give notice to regulated entities to anticipate inspection, and 

various international and federal laws require those ships and facilities to hold certain 

areas open for inspection. No suspicion whatever is required to initiate an 

inspection, and an inspection may involve entering and checking any space if

reasonably related to applicable administrative and safety regulations, or to the chain 

of events in an incident.

E.2.b. Reasonableness in the Scope of the Inspection 

A vessel or facility inspection is not a basis of authority for USCG personnel to go 

anywhere aboard a vessel or facility subject to U.S. jurisdiction The reasonable extent 

of an inspection is measured by the extent of its intrusion into areas where there is a 

legitimate expectation of privacy. Courts have ruled that no reasonable expectation 

of privacy exists in the machinery and cargo spaces of a ship, and in areas subject to 

common access of those legitimately aboard the vessel. 

E.2.c. Proper Inspections 

Properly conducted vessel and facility inspections are fully consistent with the Fourth 

Amendment standards in that they are:

• Serve an important public interest; and

• Involve areas where a lesser expectation of privacy exists. 

E.2.d. Evidence of Criminal Activity 

When IOs have a reasonable suspicion of illegal activity, but collecting evidence of 

that activity requires examination of spaces or persons beyond the scope of a normal 

facility or vessel inspection, the IO shall expeditiously request guidance from their 

mismatches are Latent Unsafe Conditions (LUCs) that should be examined in 

the Causal Analysis. 

Whenever timely notice of an incident is received, inspection of the incident scene 

must be a high priority for the IO. Appropriate inspection of the incident scene will 

reveal much of the information necessary for accurate and complete analyses of the 

facts and causes. 

E.2. INSPECTIONS 

AND SEARCHES

• Limited in scope; 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 3: FACT FINDING AND EVIDENCE HANDLING

B3-10 

servicing legal office. IOs SHALL NOT extend normal inspections such that any 

person’s Fourth Amendment rights are infringed upon. 

Notwithstanding any of the above, an IO or other individual properly qualified to 

conduct law enforcement operations may proceed in accordance with the MLEM. 

F. EVIDENCE

IOs collect evidence to establish truth. Evidence proves or disproves (or tends to 

prove or disprove) the truth of a fact or matter in question. The word “evidence” 

means any matter of fact from which an inference may be drawn as to a second 

matter of fact that is in question. Evidence may be physical, oral, or written 

(documentary) and may concern an incident, circumstances, or actions relevant to the 

issues. There are three basic types of evidence: 

• Direct Evidence (includes witness statements and testimony) 

• Indirect Evidence (a.k.a. circumstantial evidence, generally tends to ‘disprove’ 

something or indirectly prove something) 

IOs should pursue them all. 

F.2. WHEN 

CONTROL OF 

EVIDENCE IS 

REQUIRED

Whenever evidence (i.e. pollution samples) is taken in support of a criminal 

investigation, control of evidence with a proper chain of custody in accordance with 

COMDTINST M16201.1 (series) is required. For any other purposes, control of 

evidence is at the discretion of the Senior Marine Investigator. 

F.2.b. Transfer of Custody 

F.3. CONTROL FOR 

LATER 

IDENTIFICATION • A description of the evidence (what it is); 

• Where it was found (being very specific as to the location: “... from the 

bottom right drawer of the desk in the office of the Chief Engineer.” 

F.1. GENERAL

• Real Evidence (includes physical and documentary evidence) 

F.2.a. General 

When CGIS Special Agents are involved in a case, original evidence should normally 

be transferred to them. All original evidence should be secured in a locked evidence 

locker (locked refrigerator for oil) until transfer/disposition instructions are received 

from the prosecutor. Access to, and the release of, evidence from an evidence locker 

should be controlled by as few as personnel as possible who should maintain a log 

recording evidence received and evidence released. An IOs locking file drawers may 

serve as an evidence locker, provided the IO has sole access to the drawer, that it 

remains locked, and that proper chain of custody control forms are rigorously used. 

Whenever control of evidence is required, the IO must prepare careful 

documentation that will show: 

• Who found the evidence;
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 3: FACT FINDING AND EVIDENCE HANDLING

B3-11 

• What happened to the evidence after it was collected/seized, (the complete 

chain of custody.) 

F.4. IDENTIFYING 

EVIDENCE 

F.4.a. Process for Identifying Evidence 

When physical evidence, including pollution samples, are collected (e.g. pollution 

samples after a pollution incident, lube oil samples after a mechanical failure), they 

should be placed in an appropriate container (a sample jar for oil samples; a seal-able 

plastic bag for samples of garbage, plastic, or other pollutants) and sealed with 

evidence tape, which shall be initialed and dated by the person who collected the 

sample and then assigned an ECN. Other physical evidence that cannot be feasibly 

placed in one of the above mentioned or other type containers (i.e. a large overboard 

valve) shall be appropriately tagged. The tag will be initial and dated by the person 

who collected the sample and then given an ECN.

The ECN is simply an identification giving a “short hand” for identifying evidence. 

The IO shall assign each piece of evidence an ECN . The following is the 

recommended format: Activity Number (from MISLE), a sequential number as it is 

discovered (1, 2, 3, etc.), and the collector’s initials. 

EXAMPLE: CDR Kelly M. Post collected evidence in support of MISLE Incident 

Investigation Activity 1024581. This is the second piece of evidence collected for 

this investigation. The ECN would look like this: 1024581-02-KMP 

Because the general “walk around” (inspection/investigation technique of walking 

around the scene) rarely occurs at an empty scene, operations will usually be going on 

at the time that IOs take evidence into custody. In some instances, copies of the 

documentary evidence will be sufficient, and IOs should plan how they will make 

copies in this case. 

F.6. SELECTING 

WHICH EVIDENCE TO 

TAKE

When collecting evidence, the IO must assign each piece of evidence (i.e. each 

document or small group of documents) an Evidence Control Number (ECN). The 

IO should have a list of each piece of evidence they control with a brief description 

of the evidence, where it is located, who took custody/discovered it, and it’s 

final/current disposition. 

F.4.b. Tagging of Physical Evidence 

F.4.c. Evidence Control Number (ECN) 

F.5. COPYING 

DOCUMENTARY 

EVIDENCE

By the very nature of human beings, the most productive and efficient work (with 

regard to evidence) will be done during the “walk around” – not weeks later while 

reviewing the files. While there is a temptation to “take everything,” this will cause 

both alarm and ultimately much more work. In order to minimize the amount of 

irrelevant evidence taken into custody, the IOs and/or Marine Board Recorder 

should review checklists of equipment, reports, documents, etc., that would be 

expected to have valuable information to the occurrence. Although additional 

evidence will inevitably surface, this concentrated time spent at the beginning of the 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 3: FACT FINDING AND EVIDENCE HANDLING

B3-12 

G. PHYSICAL EVIDENCE

Because an IO will not necessarily know which evidence is relevant to the findings of 

fact or conclusions regarding cause, physical evidence should be broadly documented 

and key pieces of evidence should be taken into custody. In general, where a piece of 

physical evidence may be fully documented through photographs, etc., (e.g. a 

substitute original) it is preferable not to take the object into evidence. Where 

enforcement proceedings may result (as in environmental crimes), however, the 

object should be taken into custody. 

G.2. AUTHORITY 

TO COLLECT AND 

RETAIN PHYSICAL 

EVIDENCE

G.3. RETENTION 

OF ORIGINAL 

RECORDS /

DOCUMENTS ON BOARD 

SHIPS

G.3.a. General 

G.3.b. Certified Copies 

G.4. ISSUING 

SUBPOENAS TO 

COMPEL THE 

PRODUCTION OF 

PHYSICAL EVIDENCE

G.4.a. General 

An IO may serve a subpoena on the custodian of certain evidence necessary for the 

purposes of an investigation. The subpoena orders the custodian to appear with 

specific books, papers, records, or documents so that they may be used as evidence 

and be admitted into the official record of the investigation. See Chapter A3 for 

more information. 

“walk around” will shorten the overall length of the investigation. 

G.1. GENERAL

The authority to collect and retain physical evidence is implicit in the Coast Guard’s 

authorizing statutes for investigation and law enforcement. The IO should contact 

the servicing legal office immediately if his or her authority to collect and/or retain 

evidence is challenged during fact-finding. 

Retention of original records and documents on board ships is guided by the IMO 

Maritime Safety Committee (MSC) and Marine Environment Protection Committee 

(MEPC) joint circular MSC-MEPC.4/Circ.1. In accordance with this policy, and IO 

shall only take the original documents when necessary for the investigation. IOs 

should accept a certified copy if it is legible and conveys the exact information as the 

original (e.g. erasures, pertinent differences in color of ink or style of writing, if any, 

torn pages, handwritten comments - especially those written in margins, and any 

indication of possible tampering - white-out, and extra pages taped in). Coordination 

with the servicing legal office is urged in making the determination of necessity. 

Always provide the opportunity for the Master to certify (under direct supervision) 

and retain copies. Upon removal of an original, be prepared to provide a certified 

copy to the master as expeditiously as possible, especially if the document is required 

for the vessel to attest to their compliance with various laws, regulations or 

international treaties and protocols. Do not stamp certified copies as “Certified to be 

True.” When providing certified copies to the vessel, avoid characterizing documents 

as being truthful. The IO shall provide a letter to the master identifying the original 

documents removed. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 3: FACT FINDING AND EVIDENCE HANDLING

B3-13 

G.4.b. Subpoenas for Cooperative Custodians of 

Evidence 

It is sometimes in the interest of the Coast Guard to subpoena cooperative witnesses, 

as a witness under subpoena is in a more favorable position under the laws relating to 

the protection of witnesses. Individuals under subpoena are usually less reluctant to 

give testimony detrimental to friends or relatives or in some way derogatory to 

themselves. Furthermore, some private agencies (such as drug testing consortiums) 

routinely require subpoenas for the production of their records, as a protection to 

themselves. Additionally, some employers require a subpoena before they will permit 

an employee to miss work in order to testify. 

G.5. VIDEO AND 

AUDIO TAPE

G.5.a. General 

IOs are authorized and encouraged to videotape or otherwise record their 

inspections/investigation of facilities and/or vessels, particularly following significant 

occurrences, bearing in mind that still photographs are often more easily presented 

and used in formal proceedings. Also, keep in mind that while videotaping, 

conversations will be recorded and should maintain a professional demeanor. Video 

taping should be limited to open and obvious recording in an area the are permitted 

to be and may not be conducted covertly. 

G.5.b. When Permitted 

From a legal standpoint, an IO may videotape or otherwise record anything where 

the IO has the lawful right to be (i.e., anyplace during the inspection); and/or any 

conversation in which the IO is participating. As a matter of policy, the IO shall 

ensure that recorded interviews begin with a statement from the person being 

interviewed that he or she has no objection to the recording of the interview. IOs 

should exercise considered judgment in recording interviews, in that recording can 

cause witnesses discomfort and limit their testimony. Similarly, excessive recording 

can needlessly complicate the investigative case file. 

The use of concealed recording devices is not authorized. 

Each inspection or interview should be recorded on a unique tape or other recording 

medium (rather than have multiple interviews or inspections on the same tape). The 

tape should have the following information written on it: 

• Date of the recording; 

• Time of the recording; 

• Subject of the recording, and 

G.5.c. Concealed Recording Devices 

G.5.d. Individual Audio/Video Tapes 

• Person making the recording; 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 3: FACT FINDING AND EVIDENCE HANDLING

B3-14 

• ECN 

G.6. PHOTOGRAPHS

• Orientation to the scene of the incident; 

• An accurate record of details; 

• May show (im)proper use/assembly of equipment or materials; 

• Documents evidence of marks, spills, etc.; and 

Pictures should be taken of the overhead view, view from four points, medium range 

shots for orientation, close-up shots for detail, weather (when applicable), etc. For 

scale, IOs should place a ruler (or other object of known size) or people in the photo. 

It also helps to place small objects on a blue background for color detail. IOs should 

keep a log of photos taken that includes the date, time, location and subject 

information. 

G.7.a. General 

Many modern vessels carry enormous amounts of electronic data on Voyage Data 

Recorders (VDRs). VDRs integrate inputs from many pieces of equipment 

(including GPS, radars, rudder and engine order telegraph) with audio recordings 

from concealed microphones located throughout the bridge. Data obtained by the 

VDR can help to corroborate witness statements, identify or eliminate equipment 

malfunction, evaluate crew performance, and quantify environmental conditions 

eliminating much of the guesswork in determining causal factors in the investigation. 

This could prove critical in determining which regulations, equipment, and 

operational procedures require modification to prevent these accidents from 

happening again. This information is recorded in various ways on various kinds of 

media; they are often recorded-over every twenty-four to forty-eight hours. 

Therefore, if VDR information is deemed necessary, it should be obtained in a timely 

manner. The IO should keep in mind that VDR data is readable only with the 

required software from the VDR manufacturer. CG-545 will provide assistance in 

this matter. 

G.7.b. Divers and ROV’s 

Photographs are an excellent way to document physical evidence or information. It 

provides (and is not limited to) the following: 

• Records relative positions; 

• Show deterioration or lack of maintenance. 

G.7. ELECTRONIC 

RECORDS

Many times when dealing with a vessel sinking without the possibility of salvage, the 

collection of physical evidence is nearly impossible. The use of divers and/or a 

Remote Operated Vehicle (ROV) can be very useful in obtaining video evidence. 

Frequently the vessel owners or operators opt to secure and use divers and ROVs. 

The evidence collected can be obtained by subpoena. The IO should keep in mind 

that Marine Safety and Security Teams may also have resources available, such as side 

scan sonar and ROVs. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 3: FACT FINDING AND EVIDENCE HANDLING

B3-15 

G.8. OTHER 

PHYSICAL EVIDENCE

Other physical evidence may be collected by the IO as deemed necessary. This may 

include items such as lifesaving equipment, dive gear, paint scrapings, piping, etc. 

CG-545 can provide assistance with the analysis of physical evidence collected, 

including lab analysis.

H. DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE

H.1.

INTRODUCTION

Documentary evidence includes all kinds of documents, records, and writings, and is 

subject to the same rules of evidence as oral testimony. While the testimony of 

people making log book entries or the actual documents themselves are the preferred 

evidence, getting testimony or retaining documents is not possible or desirable in 

every instance. Further, IOs often collect documentary evidence that tends to 

corroborate other evidence, such as testimony. Copies of documentary evidence 

should ensure that the entries are legible. When they are not legible, a typewritten 

extract should be made. 

H.2. PHOTOCOPIES Photocopies should be certified on the reverse side as in the following example: “I 

hereby certify that I have seen the original logbook and that the reverse of this sheet 

is a true and correct copy of page 46, book I, the Official Logbook of the M/V 

SEALAND TRADER, for the voyage commencing February 1, 2003 [dated and 

signed by the IO, including rank and duty station].” The copy should also be 

authenticated as a true copy and signed by the master of the vessel, along with the 

date and time. 

H.3. EXTRACTS When extracts are typewritten, only those entries pertinent to the case need be 

extracted. They shall be certified as in the following example: “I hereby certify that I 

have examined the official logbook, compared the above extract to it, and found it to 

be a true and correct copy of all entries pertaining to Joseph Drake on page 17, book 

II of the Official Logbook of the M/V SEALAND TRADER for the voyage 

commencing February 1, 2003 [dated and signed by the IO, including rank and duty 

station].” 

H.4. SHIPPING 

ARTICLES

Coast Guard forms CG-705A, and their equivalents constitute contractual 

agreements between the master and members of the crew on U.S. ships. 46 USC 

10302 defines the particulars to be included for foreign or intercoastal voyages (see 

NVIC 1-86) on U.S. vessels. When the vessel will be making a foreign voyage, they 

are referred to as “foreign” articles; when the vessel is on a coastwise voyage, they are 

“coastwise” articles. Shipping articles or properly authenticated extracts made on 

form CG-2639H (extract of shipping articles – used when photocopiers were not 

available) provide evidence that a mariner was aboard a specific vessel at the time of 

an incident. 

H.5. OFFICIAL 

LOG BOOKS

Logbooks contain important evidence regarding most incidents; the following policy 

applies to the review of logbooks and use of logbooks as documentary evidence. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 3: FACT FINDING AND EVIDENCE HANDLING

B3-16 

Under 46 USC 11301, U.S. vessels making foreign and intercoastal voyages must have 

an “Official Logbook” and make certain entries in them. Logbook offenses listed in 

46 USC 11501 and made in accordance with 46 USC 11502 may constitute prima 

facie evidence of the facts they recite. Foreign vessels are not required to have an 

Official Logbook by U.S. law, but almost all home administrations have a parallel 

requirement. 

H.6. OTHER 

DOCUMENTS

There are numerous documents kept aboard a vessel which may be valuable in 

determining the facts surrounding an incident. The IO should consider examining 

the following shipboard documents (when applicable): 

• Ship’s register; 

• Current certificates; 

• Charts and record of chart corrections; 

• Oil Record Books for cargo and bunker. 

• Oil Transfer Procedures 

• Echo Sounder Chart; 

• Crew list and crew Merchant Mariners’ Credentials, including state pilots’ 

licenses. 

• Articles of Agreement 

• Vessel Response Plans, garbage plans, etc. 

• Declaration of Inspection 

• Vessel Maneuvering Characteristics 

• Bell Books (Bridge and Engineroom) 

• Radio Log 

• ISM Code certification; 

• Crew qualifications; 

• Course recorder 

• Deck Log Book; 

• Port log, and log abstract; 

• Captain’s Night Orders 

• Personal log books (typically for deck and engine officers only) 

• Cargo Orders Book (like the Captain’s Night Orders but issued by the Chief 

• Passenger list; 

• Bridge Log Book (other than the official log book) 

• Weather Log 

• Captain’s Standing Orders 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 3: FACT FINDING AND EVIDENCE HANDLING

B3-17 

Mate regarding cargo operations 

• Ship Reporting Records 

• Voyage plan

• Engineroom Log Book; 

• Chief Engineer’s Standing Orders; 

• Maintenance record; 

• Maintenance manuals; 

• Bar records - daily purchases - voyage receipts, etc.;

• Pilot notes, trip sheets, and voyage plans; 

• Master-Pilot conference card (typically held by the pilot) 

H.7. AUTOMATION 

RECORDS

Many vessels have automated record keeping for such as engine order logs, alarm 

logs, shaft speeds, and so on. These devices record the sequence of events in 

significant detail, including precise times and exact events (e.g. shaft RPM increased 

at precisely 08:31:20). IOs should exercise caution in evaluating this form of 

evidence. Specifically, automated logs are only as good as their last calibration, and 

should not be accepted without some degree of confidence that the times and actions 

reported are accurate. Accordingly, such documents should be discussed during 

interviews with the staff responsible for their maintenance to ensure they are valid 

records. 

The IO should collect all pertinent company policies and records that are applicable 

to the incident. Many of these will be included in the company’s Safety Management 

System. These documents will be of great assistance if causal or human error analysis 

is required. 

I. ORAL EVIDENCE

I.1. GENERAL IOs rely principally upon oral evidence to determine the sequence of events in an 

incident. This evidence is collected in interviews, which are detailed but informal 

questionings of witnesses or other people with knowledge of the incident. Interviews 

can be more or less formal, ranging from a brief questioning to determine that 

bystanders did not witness an event (e.g., people pier-side at the time two vessels 

collided), to a formal deposition of witnesses who will likely be unavailable to give 

direct testimony at a later date. This evidence should be collected in forms ranging 

from the IO’s notes to transcriptions of recorded testimony; no chain of custody is 

normally required for such evidence, though IOs should be prepared to provide an 

affidavit attesting to the authenticity of notes prepared from oral testimony. For this 

• Notes kept by deck officers regarding cargo operations, etc., and by oilers 

regarding their rounds; 

H.8. COMPANY 

RECORDS AND 

POLICIES
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 3: FACT FINDING AND EVIDENCE HANDLING

B3-18 

reason, telephonic interviews should be limited to those investigations where only a 

brief summary of the facts is desired or to determine information leading to other 

sources of information. 

I.2. ON-SITE 

WITNESSES

Interviews shall generally begin with the ship management team, including the Master 

and Chief Engineer who can provide an overview of the incident, and continue with: 

• First hand witnesses present at the occurrence site at the time of the 

occurrence itself, regardless of rank / position in the organization; 

• First hand witnesses present at the occurrence site at the time of the 

occurrence itself, but from outside the organization. Examples could be 

berthing or mooring assistance or visiting personnel such as agents or 

contractors; 

• First hand witnesses present at the time of the occurrence but not at the 

occurrence location itself. Examples could be ship’s staff on the bridge of a 

ship witnessing a mooring incident on the main deck below; 

• Those not involved with the incident itself but involved in the immediate 

aftermath, especially those engaged in the recovery process. Examples could

be those involved in damage control, shipboard fire fighting or first aid 

medical treatment; 

• Tug, mooring boat, or pilot vessel crews; 

• Shore-based fire fighters;

• Pier / terminal staff; 

• Other vessels in the immediate vicinity; and 

• Operators of Vessel Traffic Services (VTS). 

I.3. OFF-SITE 

WITNESSES

IOs shall consider interviewing the following off-site witnesses: 

Designated person under the ISM Code; 

Ship operators ashore; 

Company general managers ashore; 

Specialist consultants (relevant to the incident); 

Port or flag state inspectors; 

Regulatory authorities; 

Classification Society Representatives;

Safety committee members including crew representatives; and 

• First hand witnesses present at the time of the occurrence but not at the 

occurrence location itself and from outside the organization. Examples could 

be a pilot on the bridge witnessing a mooring incident on the deck below; 

• Search and rescue personnel including helicopter crews; 

Technical superintendents ashore; 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 3: FACT FINDING AND EVIDENCE HANDLING

B3-19 

Designers, shipbuilders, manufacturers and repairers. 

I.4. SCOPE OF 

INTERVIEWS

I.5. PREPARATION 

FOR INTERVIEWS Within the limits of available time, thorough preparation should be made prior to an 

interview to ensure that all pertinent details are covered. Preparation should include a 

detailed study of the material that has already been accumulated, including the scene 

of the incident. The IO shall become familiar with the laws, regulations, and 

guidance material applicable to the matter under investigation, along with any job 

aids. In some cases, IOs may find it valuable to discuss the situation in non-specific 

terms with experts in the field, whether inside or outside the Coast Guard. 

Familiarity with these factors will enable the IO to properly prepare a brief, detect 

any discrepancies and falsehoods in the subject’s statements, and discourage the 

subject from withholding or distorting information. On the basis of such a detailed 

study, the IO shall carefully determine the following: 

• Proper persons to be interviewed; 

• Probable degree of willingness of each person to be questioned; 

• Manner of interview and psychology to be employed, based on the subject’s 

position, willingness, reliability, personality, and personal weaknesses as 

revealed by the evidence collected to that point; 

• Location of the interview; and 

• Outline of questions to which the answers are already conclusively known 

and which can be used to test the subject’s truthfulness. 

I.5.b. Background Information 

Background information which may be appropriate to review prior to conducting 

interviews includes, but is not limited to: 

• Records of instruction / briefings given on the particular job being 

investigated. 

• Location plans; 

• Command structure and persons involved; 

The scope of an interview will vary depending on the degree to which the person 

being interviewed was involved in the incident. In general, however, interviews 

should develop information relevant to the scope of the investigation as a whole, 

namely the chain of events leading to the incident and the people, environment, 

equipment, and procedures that contributed. 

I.5.a. General 

• Reliability of their information, and any factors that may consciously or 

unconsciously influence, color, or distort such information; 

• Procedures for the type of operation involved; 

• Messages, directions, etc., given from base/headquarters concerning the 

work; and 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 3: FACT FINDING AND EVIDENCE HANDLING

B3-20 

• Any other relevant information that may allow the investigator to understand 

the context of the incident and testimony. 

I.6. PRELIMINARY 

WITNESS STATEMENTS

I.7. CONDUCTING 

THE INTERVIEW

I.7.a. Introductions 

I.7.b. Manner of the Interview 

People can feel intimidated when confronted by too many interviewers. Experience 

has shown that interviews can be effectively conducted by two interviewers and if 

appropriate, the witness may be accompanied by a friend or legal representative. 

During the course of an interview, the IO may suspect the person being interviewed 

has committed a criminal violation. In this case, IOs should continue the interview, 

but shall avoid allowing the interview to become accusatory and focused on the 

individual actions. Instead, the interview should seek to document as much factual 

information as possible regarding the occurrence. IOs will not advise people being 

interviewed of their rights unless the interview has escalated to the level of a custodial 

Once the situation in the immediate aftermath of an incident has been stabilized and 

the threat to people, property, and the environment has been removed, the IO may 

require that everyone involved commit their recollections to paper in the form of a 

written statement. The people involved may request to wait until their lawyers arrive, 

or refuse to give testimony (written or oral) until such time. In the event that witness 

statements can be obtained expeditiously, IOs can use these witness statements to 

further prepare for specific interviews and to revise the order of the interviews. 

An interview should start with the introduction of the IO and any other people 

present, the purpose of the investigation and the interview (to find out what 

happened in the matter of ...), and the possible future use of the information gained 

during the interview. Because evidence gathered by IOs may later be used as part of 

a criminal prosecution under many U.S. statutes, IOs are NOT to indicate in any way 

that the interview cannot or will not be used in criminal proceedings. If asked about 

the possibility of criminal liability by a witness or involved person before or during a 

interview, the IO should respond with words to the effect that "the United States is 

free to choose civil, criminal, or administrative enforcement when an alleged violation 

is detected, and any decision to take one type of action does not preclude another 

type of action." 

People should be interviewed singly and be asked to go step-by-step through the 

events surrounding the occurrence, describing both their own actions and the actions 

of others. The value of a witness’s statement can be greatly influenced by the style of 

the interviewer, whose main task is to listen to the witness’s story and not to be 

influenced. IOs should hold their questions until the witness has completed their 

narrative, and then use those questions to elucidate unclear areas of the testimony. 

I.7.c. Number of Interviewers 

I.7.d. Suspicion of Criminal Activity 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 3: FACT FINDING AND EVIDENCE HANDLING

B3-21 

interrogation. Whether a situation is custodial depends on whether a reasonable 

person in the suspect’s position would believe their freedom of movement has been 

limited in a way that approaches formal arrest (See Also Chapter A3 D.12 – Miranda 

Warnings). Additional interviews or interrogations of the person should be conducted 

by personnel trained and authorized to conduct criminal investigation interrogations. 

I.8. COOPERATION 

OF WITNESSES Occasionally, a witness refuses to answer questions posed by an IO, on the grounds 

that the answers would be self-incriminating. Individuals have the right not to 

answer personal questions under the Fifth Amendment, but IOs should not halt their 

investigations because a witness exerts his or her Fifth Amendment rights. Other 

witnesses may be available for interview, etc. 

The Fifth Amendment applies to personal information (i.e., what that person has 

done), and not to general information. A person, for instance, might legitimately 

refuse to answer questions such as “how did this oil spill happen?” He or she, 

however, would have no Fifth Amendment basis to avoid questions such as “who is 

your supervisor?” or “what is your company’s policy regarding notifying the Coast 

Guard?” 

I.8.c. Compelling Testimony 

If the IO does not believe that a witness’s claim to Fifth Amendment protection is 

legitimate, he or she should consult their servicing legal officer. An order may be 

sought from the federal district court directing the person to testify in accordance 

with the subpoena, or if appropriate, immunity may be granted by the Department of 

Justice. See Chapter A3 of this volume for the administrative procedures for seeking 

such an order or grant of immunity. 

I.9. DOCUMENTING 

THE INTERVIEW

I.9.a. Transcription 

I.8.a. Refusal of Witnesses to Testify 

I.8.b. Applicability of the Fifth Amendment 

At the end of an interview, the IO should summarize the discussion to ensure that 

there are no misunderstandings. This summary is invaluable both in clarifying the 

IO’s impressions of the interview and in documenting the interview for the 

investigative record. 

During formal investigations, IOs contract for a court reporter to record and 

transcribe all testimony. Similarly, audio or video recordings of testimony may also 

be transcribed when paper or electronic records are easier to reference or review than 

the audio or videotape. Court reporting services currently offer copies of the 

transcript on computer disks for no or minimal charges. The cost of scanning a 

transcript into electronic format at a later date, however, may be substantially higher. 

Transcripts in electronic format are increasingly being used to analyze evidence using 

word and phrase searches on specific topics. Such use is beneficial when preparing 

the original ROI and reviewing evidence. Whenever possible, contracts for court 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 3: FACT FINDING AND EVIDENCE HANDLING

B3-22 

I.9.b. Written Statements 

I.9.b.1. Format of Written Statements 

There are two main formats for written statements: narrative and question and 

answer (Q&A). The Q&A format is good evidence of the fact that a statement was 

freely given since it records the questions asked and the replies given. It leaves little 

ground for misinterpretations or claims that important information given the IO has 

been omitted. The Q&A format is generally most satisfactory when the issues are 

controversial or involved. Often, written statements will end in the Q&A format 

after the witness has given an initial statement in narrative format. The narrative 

format is a practical and effective way to take a statement in which the witness is 

asked simply to recount what happened chronologically. The IO should be prepared 

to ask questions after the narrative is complete that clarify or expand areas in the 

narrative. 

In addition to all information relevant to the cause of the incident, the written 

statement should contain the following (See Appendix 3 for an example written 

statement): 

• Place and date the statement was taken; 

• The full name, address, phone numbers, and social security number of the 

witness, along with acknowledgment that the IO has provided the witness 

with a Privacy Act statement; 

• A statement at the end of the testimony indicating the witness has read the 

written statement and finds it a true representation of his or her testimony. 

The witness’ signature on the last page and initials on every other page. 

Page numbers in the format “Page __ of ___ pages.” 

I.9.b.3. Refusal to Sign Written Statements 

If a witness refuses to sign a written statement extracted from his or her oral 

testimony, the IO should place an addendum at the end of the statement to the effect 

reporting services should include a requirement for production of a copy of the 

transcript on a 3 1⁄2 ” high density computer disks in ASCII data format or on a 

compact disc. 

Written statements are permanent official records of the testimony of complainants, 

witnesses, and subjects interviewed during an investigation. Oral statements from 

witnesses or subjects that have evidentiary weight shall be transcribed or summarized 

as soon as possible after the interview. This is particularly important if the statements 

are derogatory. The IO should never make reference to a written statement until 

after completion of the oral testimony. The statement is one of the IO’s most

valuable tools, and care will be exercised to develop all material matters therein. 

I.9.b.2. Contents of Written Statements 

• A statement from the witness that the testimony is given voluntarily; 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 3: FACT FINDING AND EVIDENCE HANDLING

B3-23 

that it was read to or by the maker, who admitted the contents were true but refused 

to sign the statement. Where possible, the IO should have another person who was 

also present while the statement was read sign the addendum as well. The addendum 

should also contain the witness’s reason for refusing to sign when it can be 

discovered. 

I.9.c. Letter in Lieu of a Statement 

In some cases, IOs may be unable to obtain written statement because witnesses are 

no longer available for in person interviews. In such cases, the IO may accept a letter 

containing the pertinent information in lieu of a written statement. IOs should advise 

witnesses writing letters to ensure they contain the same information required in a 

written statement, along with answers to specific questions the IO may provide. 

I.10.

INVESTIGATING 

OFFICER’S NOTES ON 

THE INTERVIEW

Any information that is not be included in the official record of the investigation are 

considered ‘investigator’s notes.’ This can be in the form of ‘sticky notes,’ notes on 

legal pads, etc. Investigator’s notes should be properly disposed of following the 

closure of an investigation. 

In cases being considered by the District Commander and/or the DOJ for criminal 

prosecution, investigator's notes may be subject to "Discovery" as items of 

evidentiary value and therefore should be retained until otherwise directed by DOJ 

and/or appropriate Coast Guard legal counsel. 

J. OTHER INFORMATION

J.1. JOB AIDS 

AND QUESTIONNAIRES

Appendix 2 of this manual provides job aids and questionnaires for use when 

conducting interviews. While they may be of assistance, IOs are cautioned NOT to 

use them as checklists. Interviews and lines of questioning should be kept to those 

areas deemed relevant on their face. 

J.2. POST 

CASUALTY DRUG AND 

ALCOHOL TESTING

IOs are cautioned that post-casualty drug and alcohol testing is mandatory for 

persons directly involved in the incident. Nothing in this guidance affects those 

requirements. For additional guidance on post casualty drug and alcohol testing, see 

Part C of this volume. 

J.3. 96 HOUR 

WORK/REST HISTORY

Pursuant to the IMO Code for the Investigation of Marine Casualties and Incidents 

and to Coast Guard policy, IOs should collect a 96 Hour Work / Rest History 

(including sleep, watch, off-watch duties, recreational time, meals, alcohol 

consumption, tobacco consumption, and drug (prescription or illegal) consumption) 

for each person interviewed and directly involved in a marine casualty. 
USCG Marine Safety Manual 

Volume V: Investigations and Enforcement

PART B: INVESTIGATION

Chapter Four: 

Marine Casualty Analysis
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 4: MARINE CASUALTY ANALYSIS

B4-i 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

A. GENERATING A TIMELINE 1

A.1. COLLECTING FACTUAL INFORMATION .............................................................................................................................1

A.2. CLASSIFICATION OF INFORMATION...................................................................................................................................1

A.3. DETERMINE THE SEQUENCE OF THE ACTIONS/ EVENTS/ CONDITIONS..............................................................................1

B. CONDUCTING CAUSAL ANALYSIS.................... 1

B.1. FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES OF CAUSAL ANALYSIS (UNDERLYING FOUNDATION) ..........................................................1

B.2. HOW SYSTEMS OPERATE..................................................................................................................................................2

B.2.a. Model of Production.................................................................................................................................................2

B.2.b. The First Element: Organizations and Decision Makers.........................................................................................2

B.2.c. The Second Element: Workplaces and Line Managers.............................................................................................3

B.2.d. The Third Element: Preconditions ...........................................................................................................................3

B.2.e. The Fourth Element: Production and Line Workers ................................................................................................4

B.2.f. The Fifth Element: Defenses .....................................................................................................................................4

B.2.g. The System as a Whole .............................................................................................................................................1

B.3. HOW SYSTEMS FAIL.........................................................................................................................................................1

B.3.a. Introduction: Threats, Defenses, and Negative Outcomes.......................................................................................1

B.3.b. Active Failures and Latent Unsafe Conditions (LUCs)............................................................................................1

B.3.b.1. Active Failures ......................................................................................................................................................2

B.3.b.2. Latent Unsafe Conditions (LUCs).........................................................................................................................2

B.3.c. Causes of System Accidents: “Swiss Cheese Diagram”...........................................................................................1

B.3.d. Organizational Factors............................................................................................................................................1

B.3.d.1. Common Organization Factors.............................................................................................................................2

B.3.e. Workplace Factors....................................................................................................................................................3

B.3.e.1. Common Workplace Factors.................................................................................................................................3

B.3.f. Preconditions ............................................................................................................................................................4

B.3.f.1. Common Precondition LUCs .................................................................................................................................4

B.3.g. Production Factors...................................................................................................................................................5

B.3.g.1. Common Production Factors ................................................................................................................................5

B.3.h. Defense Factors........................................................................................................................................................5

B.3.h.1. Common Defense Factors .....................................................................................................................................5

B.4. ANALYZING CAUSE..........................................................................................................................................................6

B.4.a. Identify the Initiating Event......................................................................................................................................6

B.4.b. Identify the Subsequent Events and Failed Defenses that Allowed them to Occur...................................................6

B.4.c. Identify the Production Factors................................................................................................................................7

B.4.d. Identify the Preconditions.........................................................................................................................................8

B.4.e. Identify the Defense Factors that would Prevent the Initiating Event from Occurring ............................................8

B.4.f. Identify the Workplace Factors and Failed Defenses................................................................................................8

B.4.g. Identify the Organization Factors and Failed Defenses...........................................................................................9

B.5. CONCLUSIONS FOLLOWING CAUSAL ANALYSIS ...............................................................................................................9

B.5.a. What do I do with the results of Causal Analysis? ...................................................................................................9

B.6. Figure B.1..................................................................................................................................................................10

B.7. Figure B.2..................................................................................................................................................................11

B.8. Figure B.3..................................................................................................................................................................12 

C. CONDUCTING HUMAN ERROR ANALYSIS .............. 12

C.1. INTRODUCTION TO HUMAN ERROR ANALYSIS ................................................................................................................12

C.1.a. General...................................................................................................................................................................12
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 4: MARINE CASUALTY ANALYSIS

B4-ii 

C.1.b. Reason’s Generic Error Modeling System (GEMS)...............................................................................................13

C.2. INTRODUCTION TO MODEL OF HUMAN PERFORMANCE...................................................................................................13

C.3. HOW PEOPLE SOLVE PROBLEMS AND PERFORM TASKS ..................................................................................................13

C.3.a. General...................................................................................................................................................................13

C.3.b. The Lowest Level of Performance: Skill-Based......................................................................................................13

C.3.b.1. Switching up from SB Performance ....................................................................................................................14

C.3.c. The Middle Level of Performance: Rule-Based......................................................................................................14

C.3.c.1. Matching Patterns: Selecting the Right Rule......................................................................................................14

C.3.c.2. Switching down to SB Performance ....................................................................................................................14

C.3.c.3. Expertise..............................................................................................................................................................14

C.3.c.4. Switching up from RB Performance ....................................................................................................................15

C.3.d. The Highest Level of Performance: Knowledge-Based..........................................................................................15

C.3.d.1. Quality of KB Performance.................................................................................................................................15

C.3.d.2. Switching down to RB (and SB) Performance.....................................................................................................15

C.3.e. Rasmussen’s Pyramid.............................................................................................................................................15

C.4. IDENTIFYING THE UNSAFE ACT OR DECISION .................................................................................................................16

C.4.a. General....................................................................................................................................................................16

C.4.b. Definition of “Unsafe Act” and “Unsafe Decision”...............................................................................................16

C.4.c. Identifying the Hazard.............................................................................................................................................16

C.5. EXECUTION ERROR OR PLANNING ERROR.......................................................................................................................16

C.5.b. Execution Errors....................................................................................................................................................16

C.5.b.1. Analysis Check: SB Performance?......................................................................................................................16

C.5.b.2. Analysis Check: More than One Unsafe Act or Decision?..................................................................................17

C.5.c. Planning Errors.......................................................................................................................................................17

C.5.c.1. Analysis Check: Rule or Knowledge-Based Performance?.................................................................................17

C.6. EXECUTION ERROR CATEGORIZATION: ATTENTION OR MEMORY..................................................................................17

C.6.a. General...................................................................................................................................................................17

C.6.b. Attention Failure ....................................................................................................................................................17

C.6.b.1. Analysis Check: Did the Person Remember the Plan?........................................................................................17

C.6.c. Memory Failure......................................................................................................................................................18

C.6.c.1. Analysis Check: Was Key Information Missing?.................................................................................................18

C.7. PLANNING ERROR CATEGORIZATION: MISTAKE OR VIOLATION ....................................................................................18

C.7.b. Mistakes .................................................................................................................................................................18

C.7.b.1. Analysis Check: Aware of Applicable Rules or Plans?.......................................................................................18

C.7.c. Violations ...............................................................................................................................................................19

C.7.c.1. Analysis Check: Specific Intended Actions Clear?.............................................................................................19

C.7.d. Types of Planning Errors.......................................................................................................................................19

C.7.e. Mistakes..................................................................................................................................................................19

C.7.e.1. RB Mistakes.........................................................................................................................................................19

C.7.e.1.a. Use of a Bad Rule .............................................................................................................................................20

C.7.e.1.b. Misuse of a Good Rule .....................................................................................................................................20

C.7.e.2. KB Mistakes.........................................................................................................................................................20

C.7.e.2.a. Heuristics..........................................................................................................................................................21

C.7.e.2.b. Bias...................................................................................................................................................................21

C.7.f. Violations................................................................................................................................................................21

C.7.f.1. Routine Adaptation...............................................................................................................................................21

C.7.f.2. Exceptional Adaptation........................................................................................................................................22

C.7.f.3. Sabotage...............................................................................................................................................................22

C.8. PRECONDITIONS LEADING TO HUMAN ERROR ................................................................................................................22

C.9. CONCLUSIONS FOLLOWING HUMAN ERROR ANALYSIS...................................................................................................22

C.9.a. What do I do with the results of Human Error Analysis.........................................................................................22

C.9.b. Human Error Analysis Graphic .............................................................................................................................23
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 4: MARINE CASUALTY ANALYSIS

B4-iii 

D. JOB AIDS ................................. 23

D.1. INTRODUCTION ...............................................................................................................................................................23

D.2. LIST OF JOB AIDS ...........................................................................................................................................................23

D.3. JOB AIDS FOR THE COLLECTION OF INFORMATION .........................................................................................................24

D.4. JOB AIDS FOR THE SEQUENCING AND CLASSIFICATION OF INFORMATION ......................................................................31

D.5. JOB AIDS FOR THE ANALYSIS OF INFORMATION..............................................................................................................33

D.6. EXAMPLES OF COMPLETED JOB AIDS.............................................................................................................................38
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 4: MARINE CASUALTY ANALYSIS

B4-1 

A.1. COLLECTING 

FACTUAL 

INFORMATION

A.2.

CLASSIFICATION OF 

INFORMATION

The factual information that is gathered will be classified into three category types. 

They are: 

Actions: Things people do. If a person is not involved, then the classification 

cannot be considered an Action. [Example: The master agreed to passing 

arrangements with the other vessel.] 

Events: Things that happen to people and things. An event occurs when a nonliving thing does some kind of action or when something happens to a either a nonliving thing or a person. [Examples: (1) The vessel went aground. (2) The man fell 

overboard.] 

A.3. DETERMINE 

THE SEQUENCE OF 

THE ACTIONS/

EVENTS/ CONDITIONS

B.1. FUNDAMENTAL 

PRINCIPLES OF 

CAUSAL ANALYSIS 

(UNDERLYING 

FOUNDATION) 

Marine investigators shall keep the following fundamental principles in mind when 

explaining how a specific accident occurred: 

Principle #1: Shipping, diving, oil exploration, fishing, towing, fuel transfers, 

passenger operations, and recreational boating are complex production systems.

These production systems do not create new cars or refrigerators; instead they 

produce intangibles such as safe passenger voyages, timely delivery of oil, and so on. 

A. GENERATING A TIMELINE

The most basic element of conducting a marine investigation is telling the story of 

what happened. During the initial stages of every investigation, marine investigators 

should gather and record all the facts that may assist in determining causes. They 

should be aware of the dangers of reaching conclusions too early, thereby failing to 

keep an open mind. It is recommended that the fact-finding step of the marine 

investigation process be kept separate from the analysis of the collected evidence 

leading to conclusions and recommendations. The objective of the fact-finding step 

of the investigation is to collect as many facts as possible regarding the accident and 

the actions/events/conditions surrounding it. The scope of any investigation may be 

divided into four areas: people (liveware); environment; equipment (hardware); and 

procedures (software). 

Condition: Existing circumstances or state of being. Conditions may describe a 

person, place, or thing. [Examples: (1) The shaft bearing was missing a safety guard. 

(2) Policy did not exist. (3) The man was fatigued. (4) The master has 10 years of 

sailing experience.] 

This is the chronological ordering of what occurred. This is where the marine 

investigator determines the order with regard to who did what, what happened, or 

what condition existed at a particular time or over a period of time. This is the 

information that generates measurable data from which trends and preventative 

measures may be derived. 

B. CONDUCTING CAUSAL ANALYSIS
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 4: MARINE CASUALTY ANALYSIS

Because maritime transportation is a production system, it shares the elements 

common to every complex production system. 

Principle #2: All accidents (including the most minor) are failures of the system, not 

simply the human or equipment directly involved. 

Principle #3: No human error is entirely to blame. Human error is a naturally 

occurring, intrinsic part of human performance. While holding mariners accountable 

for their actions and taking steps to reduce human errors, marine investigators should 

bear Principle #2 firmly in mind. The human error could not have resulted in an 

accident unless conditions in the system (especially the system’s defenses) allowed it. 

Principle #4: System accidents have their primary origins in the fallible decisions 

made by the high-level corporate, regulatory, or plant managers. These fallible 

decisions are an inevitable part of the decision-making process, and the process of 

improving systems involves making fallible decisions harmless as opposed to 

eliminating high-level error. 

B.2. HOW SYSTEMS 

OPERATE

B.2.a. Model of Production 

Organizations

B.2.b. The First Element: Organizations and Decision 

Makers

In order for a system to operate, it must have an initial direction. At the 

organizational level, decision makers respond to the pressures, demands, and 

opportunities in the outside world and set the goals for the system. They also direct, 

at a strategic level, the ways in which the system will reach these goals. In practice, 

decision makers take limited financial and other resources (equipment, people, talent, 

expertise, and time), and direct how they will be spent in order to get the most 

productivity with the highest degree of safety (a process of balance). In the simplest 

of terms, decision makers provide the money to begin an operation, and an empty 

facility (or vessel) which, when properly equipped and staffed, will become an 

Principle #5: The whole point of conducting an investigation and of analyzing the 

causes of an incident is to improve the system and prevent reoccurrence. 

Accordingly, the marine investigator’s job is to identify system failures and propose 

fixes (recommendations).

Many psychologists view all organized human or technological systems as production 

systems. These production systems make energy, a chemical substance, a mechanism, 

or the mass transportation of any commodity (including people) by road, rail, sea, or 

air. In this view the many maritime operations, once thought independent, are 

products of the maritime transportation system. In this system, there are many 

factors that include charts and publications, aids to navigation, vessel traffic systems, 

laws and regulations, safety inspections, navigation equipment as well as all the other 

systems on vessels, including mariners who stand the watch. When these factors 

come together in precise synchronization, the product is the safe and timely transit, 

fuel transfer, or use of our nation’s waterways. As a complex production system, the 

maritime transportation system can be described in terms of the five elements of the 

model of production. Additionally, the maritime transportation system is further 

described by various factors that reside within each of the five elements. 

B4-2 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 4: MARINE CASUALTY ANALYSIS

operating facility. The Organization element is where the goals are set and a means 

to reach them is provided. 

W orkplace

B.2.c. The Second Element: Workplaces and Line 

Managers

Below the decision makers are the line managers. They must create specific plans to 

carry out operations, including the hiring of personnel, the training of personnel, the 

purchase and deployment of the right type of equipment, systems for managing 

ongoing operations, and finally, a means for reacting to all the foreseeable problems 

that arise. Again, in simple terms, line managers take the money and empty facility, 

provided by the decision maker, and transform it into a facility filled with managers, 

workers and equipment. The Workplace element is where personnel, buildings, 

equipment, and vessels have operations that are managed. Generally speaking, the 

Workplace is where production occurs. 

PreConditions

B.2.d. The Third Element: Preconditions

Although the line managers and decision makers have provided a system, that system 

cannot be considered ready to operate until both the workers and the equipment they 

use are properly prepared. To be ready, the system must possess certain attributes: 

Reliable equipment of the right kind; 

A skilled and knowledgeable workforce; 

Appropriate attitudes and motivation; 

Proper work schedules, supply delivery schedules, and maintenance programs, 

Proper conditions allowing safe and efficient operations; 

Procedures that give clear guidance about how the job is to be done; and

Clear understandings of what undesirable job performance is.

Suitable environment (internal and/or external) 

Decision Makers are the high level architects and managers of the system. They set 

the rules and objectives for the system. In the maritime transportation system, 

decision makers include lawmakers and regulators, underwriters and cargo lines, 

corporate CEOs and owner-operator fishers. 

Line Managers are the specialists who take the strategies outlined for them by 

decision makers and translate them into concrete activities. In large companies, line 

managers have specialized areas of authority and operation, and are known as the 

facility manager or departmental titles such as operations, training, sales, and so on. 

In the maritime transportation system, with regard to larger vessels, line managers 

may be the master and his/her officers. In a small operation, such as an owneroperator small passenger vessel, the licensed operator may be the line manager, in 

addition to the decision maker. 

The Precondition element contains the conditions that make people and machinery 

ready to go to work. 

B4-3 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 4: MARINE CASUALTY ANALYSIS

Production

B.2.e. The Fourth Element: Production and Line Workers

Once the system is properly manned, equipped, and managed, a product can be 

created. Production is the precise synchronization of human and mechanical 

activities (actions or decisions) to produce the right product at the right time. The 

Production element contains the actual operation of the system. (e.g. safe/timely 

voyages, fuel transfer, etc.) 

Defenses

B.2.f. The Fifth Element: Defenses

In any system there are natural and man-made hazards. Where they can reasonably 

be foreseen, the system should have safeguards, called Defenses, which protect 

people and equipment from injury, damage, or production-damaging losses.

Defenses may be human (procedural), such as a buddy system or plotting fixes; or 

mechanical, such as machinery guards or life jackets; or a combination of both.

Defensive systems perform the following functions: 

Create awareness of local hazards and how they might be encountered; 

Convey an understanding of how, when, and why hazards occur in the workplace; 

Provide means (devices and systems) for detecting the presence of hazards; 

Warn people and systems that some hazard is imminent; 

Protect potential victims by separating them from the hazard; 

Allow people and system to recover from some “off-normal” or hazardous condition 

(i.e., to correct the situation); 

Contain or limit the spread of some hazard, or limit the number of victims affected; 

Provide escape from the hazard; and 

Line Workers are the professional and recreational mariners (and shore-side 

maritime workers) who perform the tasks using many types of machinery in order to 

get the job done. In the maritime transportation system, line workers are licensed 

mariners, unlicensed crew, dock workers, VTS personnel, etc. 

Rescue injured or threatened individuals from a situation in which negative outcomes 

have already occurred. 

B4-4 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 4: MARINE CASUALTY ANALYSIS

B.2.g. The System as a Whole 

The five elements in the model of production relate in very specific ways. This 

relationship can be represented as below: 

B.3.a. Introduction: Threats, Defenses, and Negative 

Outcomes 

In general terms, production systems contain defenses against foreseeable threats. 

Accidents, which can loosely be defined as the occurrence of a negative outcome 

(event), happen when there are holes in the system’s defenses through which a threat 

penetrates. 

B.3. HOW SYSTEMS 

FAIL

B.3.b. Active Failures and Latent Unsafe Conditions 

(LUCs) 

A system’s defenses can be penetrated for one of two reasons: 1) the system’s 

defenses are present but do not work properly for some reason; or 2) the system’s 

defenses are missing or entirely mismatched to the threat they face. These defense 

penetrations illustrate an important aspect of system failures: they can be active 

failures and/or they can be latent unsafe conditions (LUCs). Active failures and 

LUCs do not arise only in the defenses. The threats that penetrate defenses originate 

Organizations

PreConditions

Production

Defenses

Workplaces

Threats Incident

Defenses

Threats Accident

Defenses

The Product

B4-1 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 4: MARINE CASUALTY ANALYSIS

B4-2 

within the system itself. They are the active failures and LUCs originating in each of 

the five elements of production. 

B.3.b.1. Active Failures 

“Began a turn into the channel (the action) with an inaccurate mental picture of the 

vessel’s location (hazard).”

“Decided not to evacuate the pumproom (the decision) despite the presence of toxic 

gas (hazard).”

Active failures described as an action taken or decision made can be found in the 

actions list of the timeline in the Findings of Fact in a MISLE Incident Investigation. 

B.3.b.2. Latent Unsafe Conditions (LUCs) 

“Fatigued,” rather than “decided to stay up late watching movies despite early 

watch.” 

“Worn,” rather than “not properly maintained” or “not replaced on schedule.” 

“Inadequate design,” rather than “mistakes during design.” 

LUCs can be found in the conditions list of the timeline in the Findings of Fact in a 

MISLE Incident Investigation. 

Active Failures are unsafe acts and decisions committed in the presence of a hazard 

(condition). Generally speaking, we are the most interested in active failures 

committed by line workers during operations (i.e., in the production and defense 

elements of the system). Unsafe acts and decisions are human errors. Most often, 

active failures have an immediate impact on safety. The following are examples of 

active failures: 

Latent Unsafe Conditions (LUCs) are hazardous conditions in the system that lie 

dormant, often for years, only becoming evident when they combine with an unsafe 

act or decision to become an active failure resulting in a negative outcome (event). 

Often they arise from decisions made far from the accident scene and, at the time, 

were believed to be good or necessary. LUCs should describe the condition of the 

system arising from a fallible decision or action, rather than the decision or action 

itself. For instance: 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 4: MARINE CASUALTY ANALYSIS

B.3.c. Causes of System Accidents: “Swiss Cheese 

Diagram”

The active failures and LUCs in the maritime transportation system all exist for a 

specific period of time, and they can be thought of as holes in the elements of 

production (“the cheese”) that appear at a given time and disappear at another time 

(when the LUC disappears). Because LUCs continuously appear and disappear, they 

will not, in most cases, align. For this reason, accidents do not constantly occur in 

complex systems despite the many active failures and LUCs that may be present. 

When all the holes align at the same time, a threat may progress all the way through 

the elements of production and become an accident. As the active failures and LUCs 

are represented as threats passing through the holes, a system accident can be 

visualized as in the below “Swiss Cheese Diagram”: 

Organizations

B.3.d. Organizational Factors 

Just as decision makers set the stage for production at the organizational level with 

appropriate decisions, they also set the stage for an accident through inappropriate or 

fallible decisions. In deciding how to use their limited resources, decision makers 

face difficult choices, and the system does not help them. Money spent on improving 

the system’s productivity (i.e. making the extra run, carrying the extra cargo) has a 

relatively clear outcome: higher profit. Money spent on safety or environmental 

protection has relatively distant and long-term outcomes. Decision makers 

occasionally inappropriately weigh the system’s feedback and make bad decisions. 

These fallible decisions create LUCs in the system. Examples of poor decisions 

include a lack of regulation, poorly planned government deregulation, and too rapid 

Organizations

PreConditions

Production

Defenses

Workplace

Incident & Injury

Organizations

PreConditions

Production

Defenses

Workplace

Incident & cident & Injury

B4-1 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 4: MARINE CASUALTY ANALYSIS

B4-2 

expansion of routes or services. These decisions create LUCs that act on line 

managers. 

B.3.d.1. Common Organization Factors 

The following Organizational Factors commonly occur in system accidents:

LUCs in Resource Management 

Human Resources 

Staffing/manning (number or qualifications) 

Training 

Promotion/demotion 

Employee benefits 

Monetary/Budget Resources 

Budgeting Process 

Funds 

Material Resources (equipment, facilities, etc.) 

Material suitability 

LUCs in Organizational Climate 

Organizational Structure

Chain of command 

Delegation of authority 

Communications 

Operational Culture 

Values and beliefs 

Morale 

LUCs in Organizational Process 

Operations and Internal Oversight 

Operational tempo 

Time pressures 

Production quotas 

Incentives 

Measurements/appraisals 

Schedules 

Planning 

Risk management 

Safety management 

Procedures 

Objectives 

Policies 

Human resource 

Monetary/budget resource 

Material resource 

Organizational structure 

Lack of material 

Norms and rules 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 4: MARINE CASUALTY ANALYSIS

Operational culture 

Operations and internal oversight 

LUCs in External Oversight 

Regulations and External Oversight 

Laws/regulations 

Standards 

Oversight 

Enforcement 

Safety promotion 

Resources 

Workplaces

B.3.e. Workplace Factors 

The consequences of the Organizational Factors manifest themselves differently in 

the Workplace element of production. If a line manager is competent, motivated, 

adequately funded, properly staffed, and has adequate time, they can transform a bad 

decision from above into a less-risky or even safe activity. However, a less competent 

or poorly supplied line manager can make a bad decision worse, or execute a good 

decision in such a manner that it has bad effects. The decisions and actions of line 

managers in implementing the decisions of those above them in the system can create 

additional LUCs. Examples of line management creating latent unsafe 

(pre)conditions include inadequate procedures for doing the job, poor scheduling, 

insufficient training for line workers, and an inadequate maintenance regime. 

The following Workplace Factors commonly occur in system accidents: 

LUCs in Human Resources 

Staffing/manning (number or qualifications) 

Training 

LUCs in Monetary/Budget Resources

Funds 

LUCs in Material Resources (equipment, facilities, etc.) 

Material suitability 

Lack of material 

LUCs in Organizational Structure 

Chain of command 

Delegation of authority 

Communications 

LUCs in Operational Culture 

Norms and rules 

Values and beliefs 

Morale 

LUCs in Operations and Supervision 

Operational tempo 

B.3.e.1. Common Workplace Factors 

Budgeting process 

B4-3 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 4: MARINE CASUALTY ANALYSIS

Time pressures 

Production quotas 

Incentives 

Measurements/appraisals 

Planning 

Risk management 

Safety management 

Objectives 

LUCs in Practices and Procedures 

Human resource 

Material resource 

Organizational structure 

Operational culture 

PreConditions

B.3.f. Preconditions 

B.3.f.1. Common Precondition LUCs 

There are many factors known to degrade the performance of human beings. 

Enclosure 2 describes these factors in detail as they pertain to the use of the SHEL 

model and generating the timeline. In short, LUCs related to line workers fall into 

one of the following general categories: 

Limitations of persons 

Physical conditions 

Psychological conditions 

Psychosocial conditions 

Physiological conditions 

Person Mismatches 

With policy/procedures 

 (liveware-software) 

With equipment/gear 

 (liveware-hardware) 

With the environment 

Schedules 

Monetary/budget resource 

Operations and supervision 

Preconditions are the LUCs of the line workers and equipment itself. Some LUCs in 

workplace management can render workers and equipment unready. For instance, an 

inadequate training program could manifest itself in a variety of LUCs: excessive 

workload, undue time pressure, and motivation problems, creating ways in which 

workers would not be ready to go work. The reverse relationship is also true: a 

single LUC (gear or people not ready to work) could be created by several workplace 

factors. Examples of latent unsafe (pre)conditions include: improper gear, 

inexperience or untrained personnel, fatigue, equipment that is worn or unsuited to 

its use, navigation hazards, etc. 

B4-4 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 4: MARINE CASUALTY ANALYSIS

 (liveware-environment) 

With other person(s) 

 (liveware-liveware) 

Production

B.3.g. Production Factors 

Production Factors are the active failures that occur during an operation or as a part 

of the operation that result from one or more of the preceding LUCs and lead to the 

initiating event. Experienced marine investigators will often encounter situations in 

which a person’s precondition, such as fatigue, appears to have caused a casualty, yet 

the same person successfully accomplished the same task the day before (or the hour 

before) with the same precondition. What was different about the task at the time of 

the accident? The answer lies in the relationship between preconditions and active 

failures. It is almost impossible to predict exactly when, where, and how a given 

precondition will manifest itself into an active failure. It is difficult to say when a 

fatigued person will make a bad decision; all that can be said with certainty is that 

given enough opportunities (decisions), one decision will eventually be bad because 

of the fatigue. Examples of Production Factor active failures include omission of 

steps in a task, use of the wrong procedures, violations of law or regulation, and bad 

decisions in the presence of a hazard. 

B.3.g.1. Common Production Factors 

Production Factor active failures are discussed in detail in part C. 

Defenses

B.3.h. Defense Factors 

B.3.h.1. Common Defense Factors 

Defense Factor active failures and LUCs commonly found in system accidents 

include: 

Defenses that were present but inadequate 

Supervision/oversight 

Engineered defenses 

Briefings 

Training 

Credentials/qualification requirements 

Personal protective equipment 

Few Production Factor active failures result in actual damage or injury, even when 

the system is relatively undefended. For instance, in a grounding scenario a pilot’s 

decision to initiate a turn too early (an active failure) does not in itself cause an 

unwanted outcome. Instead, the active failure must be left undetected and 

uncorrected in order to progress into the grounding. In other words, the system’s 

defenses against a grounding are missing or inadequate. Examples of Defense Factor 

active failures and LUCs include disabled warning systems, absence of monitoring (or 

plotting of fixes), and un-enforced regulations. 

Policies/procedures 

Defensive equipment 

B4-5 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 4: MARINE CASUALTY ANALYSIS

B4-6 

Information about actual/potential hazards 

Defenses that were present but deliberately disabled 

Policies/procedures 

Training requirements 

Briefing requirements 

Credentials/qualifications requirements 

Defenses that were never present or once present but now removed 

Supervision/oversight 

Engineered defenses 

Briefings 

Training 

Personal protective equipment 

Information about actual/potential hazards 

Defenses that do not exist or are unreasonable 

Technology or systems not reasonable for use 

Human Errors 

B.4.a. Identify the Initiating Event 

One of the most difficult aspects of any investigation is identifying the aspects of an 

accident you are trying to explain. For the purposes of analyzing the causes of an 

accident, marine investigators must carefully identify the Initiating Event. While a 

variety of actions, events, and conditions will precede an accident, a point must be 

chosen at which the accident is considered to start. The marine investigator will 

initially focus on explaining how the accident began, and will then turn to explaining 

how it progressed. For the purposes of analyzing the causes of an accident, the 

Initiating Event is simply the first unwanted or negative outcome in the timeline In 

marine casualties the Initiating Event may not be the first “reportable” event. In 

many cases, the reportable event follows the Initiating Event and (when explained) 

sheds more light on the causes of the accident. See the flowchart titled, “Part 1: 

Identify the Initiating Event, Subsequent Events, & Failed Defenses,” in B.6 below. 

B.4.b. Identify the Subsequent Events and Failed 

Defenses that Allowed them to Occur 

After identifying the Initiating Event. The next step is to identify the Subsequent 

Events, which are the unwanted events that originate from and follow the initiating 

event. Next, to explain how the accident progressed from the Initiating Event into 

all the subsequent events, the marine investigator must identify the defensive failures 

that connect one event into another. These are the defenses on a vessel or platform 

arising AFTER the Initiating Event (i.e. given the Initiating Event occurred, what 

defenses would have prevented the next Subsequent Event; and so on). 

Engineered defenses deactivated 

Policies/procedures 

Credentials/qualifications requirements 

Technology or systems do not exist 

B.4. ANALYZING 

CAUSE
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 4: MARINE CASUALTY ANALYSIS

B.4.c. Identify the Production Factors 

In the simplest sense, production is the maritime operation that was being conducted 

at the time of the accident. Once the marine investigator has identified the Initiating 

Event, he or she should ask what operation was being conducted at the time and just 

previous. The next common sense question is which people (liveware) were 

conducting the operation in order to determine what actions were taken or decisions 

made. In any accident, a person will have made one or many unsafe acts or decisions, 

either by mistake or sometimes willfully (determined by human error analysis in 

Enclosure 4). The marine investigator shall identify all unsafe acts and decisions that 

occurred during production. They must be careful not to confuse production 

activities (such as navigating) with defensive activities (such as plotting fixes). As a 

rule of thumb, active failures in production have an immediate and recognizable 

effect on safety. When it becomes difficult to make a determination as to whether an 

action or decision is ‘unsafe,’ the Substitution Test may be performed. This is merely 

asking a professional (or several professionals) of similar grade and experience what 

they would do in the same situation, and to make a determination of whether the act 

or decision is unsafe (and why). 

While analyzing the information discovered during fact-finding, marine investigators 

may discover several production active failures (as well as several preconditions, 

LUCs in the workplace or organization). While each is worthy of attention because 

they must be eliminated, not all of them necessarily connect to the accident at hand. 

Marine investigators shall identify those active failures and LUCs with causal

connection to the accident. Other active failures (particularly willful violations) and 

LUCs may also be noted (and should be if severe enough). See the flowchart titled, 

“Part 2: Identify Production, Unsafe Acts/Decisions, Preconditions, & Failed 

See the flowchart titled, “Part 1: Identify the Initiating Event, Subsequent Events, & 

Failed Defenses,” in B.6 below. 

Defenses

Defenses

Defenses

B4-7 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 4: MARINE CASUALTY ANALYSIS

B4-8 

Defenses,” in B-7 below. 

B.4.d. Identify the Preconditions 

B.4.e. Identify the Defense Factors that would Prevent 

the Initiating Event from Occurring 

NOTE: Upon identifying viable failed defenses throughout the Model of 

Production, the next logical step is to conclude that they are necessary, and finally, 

recommend their implementation. This displays how vital this step is throughout. 

B.4.f. Identify the Workplace Factors and Failed 

Defenses 

Once the preconditions have been identified, the marine investigator should focus on 

the management environment to determine how and why the preconditions were 

created. Marine investigators should also be careful to consider the absence of 

management in addition to pro-active management. Marine investigators are 

cautioned to remember that the line manager’s ability to manage is limited by their 

available resources. For this reason, it is important to carefully recognize the causal 

Once the marine investigator has identified the active failures in production, they 

must ask “In what condition did the person (Liveware), Software, Hardware, and/or 

Environment (SHEL) have to be for them/it to fail?” Preconditions create the 

potential for a wide variety of active failures. Marine investigators should again 

remember that they may encounter a large number of latent unsafe (pre)conditions. 

For instance, a given mariner may have had LUCs of fatigue, drug use, and an 

aggressive attitude. In this case, it may be difficult to ascertain exactly which 

precondition has a causal connection to the production active failure. Marine 

investigators should record all preconditions internal to a person as having a causal 

connection. Similarly, they may be tempted to “weigh” a given precondition over 

another (i.e., fatigue was more important than drug use or attitude). Marine 

investigators should not give opinions as to the relative strength of various 

preconditions in their causal connection to a given production active failure without 

significant scientific basis for those opinions. See the flowchart titled, “Part 2: 

Identify Production, Unsafe Acts/Decisions, Preconditions, & Failed Defenses,” in 

B-7 below. 

Once the marine investigator has completed the previous steps, they have identified 

the active failures in production that occurred. Such active failures occur 

constantly in complex systems. However, relatively few result in accidents. When a 

system’s defenses were sufficient to detect an active failure and prevent the accident, 

a “near miss” is said to have occurred (though “near hit” may be a more appropriate 

term). In order to explain an accident, marine investigators must identify the defense 

factor failures that allowed the active failure to progress into an accident. Many faults 

may be discovered in the system’s defenses, only some of which will be causally 

connected to the production active failures and the accident. Failed defenses should 

eventually be identified for all elements of the Model of Production. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 4: MARINE CASUALTY ANALYSIS

B4-9 

connection of Organizational Factors when identifying Workplace Factors. Upon 

determining the Workplace Factors, identify any failed defenses. See the flowchart 

titled, “Part 3: Identify Workplace and Organization Factors & Failed Defenses,” in 

B.8 below. 

B.4.g. Identify the Organization Factors and Failed 

Defenses 

The basic idea underlying the causal analysis system (and the IMO documents upon 

which it is based) is that system accidents have their primary origins in fallible 

decisions made by designers and high-level decision makers. Marine investigators, 

having identified workplace LUCs, should identify the conditions to which the line 

managers were responding. Decision makers’ fallible decisions create LUCs that 

affect line managers. Marine investigators should bear in mind that decision makers 

rarely have direct access to the consequences of their decisions, and may be almost 

entirely unaware of the LUCs they have created. Upon determining the Organization 

Factors, identify any failed defenses. See the flowchart titled, “Part 3: Identify 

Workplace and Organization Factors & Failed Defenses,” in B.8 below. 

B.5.a. What do I do with the results of Causal 

Analysis? 

When properly completed, the analysis should lead to conclusions, and then, to 

Safety Recommendations. If it doesn’t it will show potential gaps in the findings of 

fact that need to be addressed. Causal analysis should give you the ability to state 

(regardless of where in the Model of Production) that there were various unsafe 

conditions (whether or not they were latent) and unsafe acts or decisions that directly 

led to the Initiating Event and Subsequent Events. Upon identifying the unsafe 

conditions statements can be made about what could correct/mitigate them. 

Defense Factors (whether failed or missing) is where correction/mitigation is 

focused. Further analysis (e.g. Human Error Analysis) should be conducted on the 

unsafe acts or decisions prior to determining the best corrective/mitigating action. 

B.5. CONCLUSIONS 

FOLLOWING CAUSAL 

ANALYSIS
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 4: MARINE CASUALTY ANALYSIS

B.6. Figure B.1. 

B4-10 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 4: MARINE CASUALTY ANALYSIS

B.7. Figure B.2. 

B4-11 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 4: MARINE CASUALTY ANALYSIS

C. CONDUCTING HUMAN ERROR ANALYSIS

C.1. INTRODUCTION 

TO HUMAN ERROR 

ANALYSIS

C.1.a. General 

Over the past few decades, public attention has increasingly focused on human error 

in major tragedies. Some experts have indicated that as true mechanical failures have 

been eliminated, attention naturally shifts to the human element. In fact, tragedies 

have always been caused by human error. In the past, however, the negative 

consequences of an accident were limited to an immediate vicinity. As our 

transportation systems have become larger, moving millions of tons of cargo and 

hundreds of thousands of people, the consequences of a disaster are greater and 

reach a much bigger area. Almost everyone is affected by a major transportation 

disaster. As these consequences reach more people, the implications of human error 

are clearer. To eliminate these principle causes of accidents, human error must be 

understood and defended against. Accordingly, one of the most important jobs a 

B.8. Figure B.3. 

B4-12 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 4: MARINE CASUALTY ANALYSIS

B4-13 

marine investigator has is identifying the types or kinds of human errors that occur 

and be better able to make effective recommendations to change unwanted behavior. 

As human error is analyzed, it may emerge that certain errors relate principally to 

specific preconditions. It may also emerge that certain errors are harder or 

impossible to defend against. These relationships determine what safety 

recommendations are made and what improvements the Coast Guard undertakes. 

C.1.b. Reason’s Generic Error Modeling System (GEMS) 

In his 1990 book “Human Error,” Dr. James Reason integrated two bodies of 

thought on human error into a single framework referred to as the Generic Error 

Modeling System (GEMS). GEMS differs from previous error analysis tools in that it 

integrates the errors that occur at all levels of performance. In creating the annex to 

the Code for the Investigation of Marine Casualties and Incidents, the IMO adopted 

GEMS as the preferred tool for investigating human performance. The Coast Guard 

has also adopted this tool. 

One of the most challenging aspects of accident investigation is describing exactly 

what type of errors the people involved made and why they made them. To

accomplish this, marine investigators need to have a thorough understanding of how 

people solve problems and perform tasks. In order to fully understand how people 

perform tasks and solve problems, it will be necessary to describe Rasmussen’s skills, 

rules, and knowledge (SRK) model of human performance. 

C.3. HOW PEOPLE 

SOLVE PROBLEMS AND 

PERFORM TASKS

C.3.a. General 

Dr. James Reason analyzes human error using the Generic Error Modeling System 

(GEMS), which is based on the work of his mentor, Dr. Rasmussen. The work of 

Dr. Rasmussen explores how people solve problems and do things. It identifies three 

levels of performance and suggests that the kind of human error a person makes 

depends on the level of performance in which they were engaged at the time. In 

1981, Dr. Rouse succinctly summarized a common theme in psychology: “people are 

furious pattern matchers.” As such, the human mind attempts to find patterns and 

select a “pre-packaged” action rather than analyze each situation and calculate the 

optimal solution. In 1986, drawing on this observation, Dr. Rassmusen identified 

three levels of human performance. They are: 1) skill-based performance (SB); 2) 

rule-based performance (RB); and knowledge-based performance (KB). 

C.3.b. The Lowest Level of Performance: Skill-Based 

C.2. INTRODUCTION 

TO MODEL OF HUMAN 

PERFORMANCE

Usually human functioning is skill-based (SB). In SB performance, the task is so 

automatic and the surroundings so familiar that the person doesn’t think about how 

to do it. The person merely mentally visualizes the desired state and it happens, 

largely without conscious monitoring. Unless we are very new to these activities, we 

do not have to consciously consider how to perform them, or focus attention on 

them. All the person must monitor is how well (and how far) the activity is 

progressing. When it’s gone far enough, the person turns the automatic function off. 

Accordingly, SB performance requires that the person pay sufficient attention, at the 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 4: MARINE CASUALTY ANALYSIS

B4-14 

Complex situations or activities cannot be solely dealt with through automatic 

functions. While we almost always start in SB performance, people switch up to the 

next level when an attention check detects a deviation from the “pre-packaged” or 

planned-for conditions. Usually the discrepancy is minor and correction is found 

early, so people return to SB performance. Our daily routines largely consist of SB 

performance with periodic shifts to and from the next level: rule-based performance. 

Most people don’t recognize that they have an enormous “library” of rules for 

dealing with every day life, most of which they would have difficulty describing in 

words. People acquire some of these rules from formal education, but most are 

learned from experience. When people detect that SB performance isn’t working or 

won’t work, they try to figure out the situation. They look for “signs” or indicators. 

This is rule-based (RB) performance. RB performance has two parts: (1) the 

perception rule (if you see sign X, then state of the world Y exists); and (2) the action 

rule (if state of the world Y exists, then action Z is appropriate). To select the right 

rule and solve the problem, a person in RB performance must select and use the right 

perception and action rules. 

As stated before, people are furious pattern matchers, meaning they look at the signs 

and match stored rules until they find one that fits. Because situations are complex, 

slight differences between situations may require different solutions. Typically, 

people discover this by trying a rule that seems to fit, and monitoring how well it 

works. When one rule fails to solve the problem even when it appeared to fit the 

situation, people tend to look for another rule, usually closely related. 

If we have a rule that fits, we use the “prepackaged” answer: if you see sign X, then 

state of the world Y is true. If state of the world Y is true, then do Z. The action Z 

is often simply a skill. For example, take the simple act of adjusting the temperature 

of a bath. If the water feels hot to the hand (sign), the water is too hot (state of the 

world). If the water is too hot (state of the world), turn on cold water (SB action). 

Although we spend most of our time in SB performance, we rarely have much 

conscious memory of that performance. With enormous practice and experience, a 

rule-based activity (even very complex RB activity) can be “pushed” below the 

conscious threshold and become SB.. 

right times or else the automatic function may go too far. 

C.3.b.1. Switching up from SB Performance 

C.3.c. The Middle Level of Performance: Rule-Based 

C.3.c.1. Matching Patterns: Selecting the Right Rule 

C.3.c.2. Switching down to SB Performance 

C.3.c.3. Expertise 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 4: MARINE CASUALTY ANALYSIS

In trying to solve a problem, people match patterns. After trying a number of rules, 

some very complex situations simply won’t match with the rules a person has. 

Basically, the situation (or problem) is completely new or novel to that person. No 

prepackaged answers apply, and the person must generate an answer from first 

principals: knowledge-based performance. 

When they don’t have rules to help them, people try to use their understanding of 

relationships to actively predict the future (without benefit of experience to help). 

This is a calculated, “do the optimal best thing” kind of operation, which requires the 

maximum available conscious attention and thought. 

As a rough rule of thumb, people perform best at the SB level, and very well at the 

RB level. However, people are not very good KB performers. As strange as it seems, 

novices and experts are equally bad at solving truly new and novel problems. A new, 

novel situation to a junior person may be a common; hence the old adage “Good 

judgment comes from experience. Experience comes from bad judgment.” 

Some situations appear to be new and novel on their face, but when people analyze, 

calculate, and try to optimize, hidden similarities between the new problem and 

others may emerge allowing the person to try to push the performance back down to 

the RB or even SB levels. Like the transition between SB and RB, a person may only 

be in KB performance for a short time before returning to the RB level. 

Ramsussen’s theory suggests that people spend most of their time executing SB tasks, 

somewhat less time performing RB tasks and decisions, and very little time in KB 

performance. This relationship can be represented as a pyramid of performance: 

•Skill-based Level

•Rule-based Level

•Knowledge Based Level

C.3.c.4. Switching up from RB Performance 

C.3.d. The Highest Level of Performance: KnowledgeBased 

C.3.d.1. Quality of KB Performance 

C.3.d.2. Switching down to RB (and SB) Performance 

C.3.e. Rasmussen’s Pyramid 

B4-15 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 4: MARINE CASUALTY ANALYSIS

B4-16 

C.4. IDENTIFYING 

THE UNSAFE ACT OR 

DECISION

C.4.a. General 

C.4.b. Definition of “Unsafe Act ” and “ Unsafe

Decision”

An Unsafe Act or Decision is a mis-action or poor decision taken in the presence of 

a hazard. The term, Active Failure, is used when discussing this definition in terms of 

causal analysis. 

C.4.c. Identifying the Hazard 

C.5. EXECUTION 

ERROR OR PLANNING 

ERROR

C.5.a. General 

C.5.b. Execution Errors 

An Execution Error is the mis-performance of an intended sequence of actions (i.e., 

the person intends to do one thing, but does another). When a person fails to 

execute the plan they have in mind, an execution error has occurred. 

C.5.b.1. Analysis Check: SB Performance? 

If a person does something other than what they intended to do, the person must be 

using relatively little conscious resources, or in SB performance. If a person is not in 

The first step in conducting human error analysis is to identify which act or decision 

to analyze from the actions list on the timeline in the Findings of Fact in a MISLE 

Incident Investigation. During the course of a typical accident, many decisions are 

made and actions taken. Of those, many will prove to have been errors. Using the 

processes outlined in Enclosures 2 and 3, each action and decision shall be separated 

and organized within the model of production. As a general guideline, if there is 

difficulty conducting human error analysis, then it is likely that several acts or 

decisions are being analyzed as one. 

Example: The decision not to wear a life jacket on a cruise ship while underway, for 

instance, (below decks with limited opportunities to reach the edge) is not an unsafe 

decision because there is no hazard. Deciding not to wear a life jacket in a small 

vessel while working near the edge or over the side, however, is an unsafe decision. 

For the purposes of human error analysis, listing or analyzing all the errors or misactions a person commits serves no purpose. Instead, focus should be placed upon 

those errors and mis-actions that are Unsafe Acts or Decisions. To do so, the 

hazard must be clearly identified in whose presence the error or mis-action was 

performed. If the hazard cannot be identified, then the error/mis-action does not 

qualify as an unsafe act or decision, and does not require further attention. Hazards 

are latent unsafe conditions (LUCs) identified in preconditions or defense. 

The second step in analyzing human error requires a decision as to whether the 

person’s error was in the execution or planning of the action or decision. Execution 

errors involve memory failures and attention errors, whereas planning errors involve 

mistakes and violations. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 4: MARINE CASUALTY ANALYSIS

B4-17 

SB performance, an execution error was not committed. 

C.5.b.2. Analysis Check: More than One Unsafe Act or 

Decision? 

In some cases, it will appear that a person made an execution error, but was in RB 

performance. As an example: A mariner may be navigating using the navigation rules 

(RB-performance), panic and turn to port. In these cases there are two separate 

errors: (1) the RB unsafe decision that led to the mariner panic; and (2) the SB unsafe 

act of pushing the rudder to port instead of to starboard. When it appears that a 

person made an execution error, but was in RB performance, the situation should be 

examined further. 

C.5.c. Planning Errors 

A Planning Error is a mistake or violation that results when the person executes a 

decision or action as they intended, but that action was inappropriate for the 

situation. Planning errors are the opposite of execution errors. The error lies not in 

how the plan was executed, but in the plan itself. 

Because planning errors involve moderate to high amounts of conscious activity 

(decisions and problem solving), all planning errors occur in RB or KB performance. 

If the person was engaged in SB performance, the error is an execution error. 

C.6. EXECUTION 

ERROR 

CATEGORIZATION:

ATTENTION OR 

MEMORY 

By definition, all execution errors are errors in SB performance. However, the 

person does have to periodically interrupt the preprogrammed behaviors to check on 

the progress of the activity. These “attention checks” establish (1) whether the 

actions are running according to plan; and (2) whether the preprogrammed sequence 

is still adequate to achieve the desired outcome. In essence, the person checks for 

deviations from his or her expectations. Execution errors occur when something 

goes wrong with the periodic attention checks. Specifically, attention checks may go 

wrong because the person pays attention at the wrong time, pays insufficient 

attention, or completely forgets to perform the attention check. In analyzing 

execution errors, it shall be determined whether the error involved a problem with 

attention or a problem with memory.

Attention Failures are execution errors that occur because the person’s cognitive 

“radar screen” or attention is directed elsewhere, leading them to fail to perform an 

attention check or to make errors in the attention check (i.e., any form of distraction 

may initiate an attention failure). 

C.5.c.1. Analysis Check: Rule or Knowledge-Based 

Performance? 

C.6.a. General 

C.6.b. Attention Failure 

C.6.b.1. Analysis Check: Did the Person Remember the 

Plan? 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 4: MARINE CASUALTY ANALYSIS

B4-18 

When it is suspected that a person had an attention failure, the analysis should be 

checked by verifying that the person remembered what attention checks they were to 

make, and when they were to be made. An attention failure involves failing to make 

these checks or mistiming them despite a clear memory of the need to do so. If the 

person momentarily forgot what they were doing, this is a memory failure, not an 

attention failure. 

Memory Failures are execution errors that occur because the person’s memory is 

faulty, leading them to forget to perform an attention check, or to make errors in the 

attention check, such as forgetting what one is looking for (often referred to in 

today’s culture as “a senior moment”). 

When a memory failure is suspected, the analysis is verified by identifying the key 

piece of information that the person forgot. Examples of key pieces of information 

include the need to check the progress of an action, or specific signs that the task is 

not accomplishing its purpose. People often view memory failures as more 

unprofessional than an attention failure, and claim they remembered all the key items, 

but simply didn’t pay that much attention to a key item, when in fact, more often 

people have forgotten to look at that item. 

C.7. PLANNING 

ERROR 

CATEGORIZATION:

MISTAKE OR 

VIOLATION

When an unsafe act or decision results from a failure in the person’s plan (rather than 

their execution of the plan), the problem with the plan originates in one of two ways. 

In the usual case, the person intends a positive outcome (i.e., they want to solve the 

problem and choose a good plan). In some unusual cases, however, the person 

willfully breaks rules in order to attain a positive outcome or for malicious purposes. 

In analyzing planning errors, it must be determined whether the person’s plan was 

faulty because they made a mistake while trying to solve the problem according to the 

rules or because they knowingly violated rules. 

C.7.b. Mistakes 

Practically speaking, all planning errors are errors in problem solving. A problem is 

any situation that requires a person to revise their current line of action. As 

previously discussed, people have a strong bias to search for and find a prepackaged 

solution to problems (i.e., use of RB performance) before resorting to the more 

mentally intense solution from first principles (i.e., use of KB performance). A 

mistake is a failure in detecting and using rules, or in solving problems from first 

principles. 

When a person deliberately violates rules or plans, the person is committing a 

violation rather than a mistake. Accordingly, if it is determined that the person was 

C.6.c. Memory Failure 

C.6.c.1. Analysis Check: Was Key Information Missing? 

C.7.a. General 

C.7.b.1. Analysis Check: Aware of Applicable Rules or 

Plans? 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 4: MARINE CASUALTY ANALYSIS

B4-19 

consciously aware of a rule or plan applicable to the situation, but did something else, 

the unsafe act or decision should be classified as a violation. 

NOTE: Natural human behavior is to rationalize past mistakes. For whatever 

reason, witnesses often find it embarrassing to admit that they simply did not know 

what to do, or that their plans were fundamentally flawed. Instead, they will often 

rationalize that they were aware of applicable rules or plans, but made an error in 

judgment. Extreme caution should be used in relying solely upon a mariner’s own 

testimony about their decisions. Instead, an evaluation of the mariner’s general level 

of knowledge and experience should be made. From this evaluation, the mariner’s 

likely awareness of the rules or plans applicable to the situation may be inferred. 

C.7.c. Violations 

A violation is a deliberate decision to break established rules, procedures, or plans 

that are applicable to a specific problem regardless of the reason. 

C.7.c.1. Analysis Check: Specific Intended Actions 

Clear? 

In many cases a plan, rule, or procedure will exist in order to deal with a specific 

problem (e.g.: Shipboard Oil Pollution Emergency Plan). The plans, protocols, or 

rules are often vague in regard to specific actions. In order to qualify as a violation, 

the person must deliberately decide to violate the specified action. If no action is 

specified (i.e., the action is up to the mariner’s judgment), the unsafe act or decision is 

more likely a mistake than a violation. 

C.7.d. Types of Planning Errors 

As previously discussed, people execute decisions primarily in SB performance, but 

they make those decisions in RB or KB performance. Violations are deliberate 

decisions to depart from legitimate problem solving. Mistakes are mis-performances 

of legitimate RB and KB problem solving. Depending on the type of problem, a 

planning error may occur in either RB-performance or KB-performance. Generally 

speaking, people search furiously for RB solutions to a given problem. In doing so, 

they (a) match observations to a rule-based criteria, and (b) try the rule out. When a 

particularly difficult problem arises, people will try many rules, refining their 

observations and so on, trying to solve the problem. In these cases, RB performance 

may fail, and the person may switch to KB performance. Common examples of RB 

mistakes and KB mistakes are listed below. 

The following information details RB and KB mistakes. 

C.7.e.1. RB Mistakes 

C.7.e. Mistakes 

In any given problem or situation, rules can be thought of as competing for the right 

to represent the current state of the world (in the person’s mind). In this way, the 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 4: MARINE CASUALTY ANALYSIS

B4-20 

The degree to which it “matches” the salient features of the situation; 

The “strength” of the rule, which depends on the number of times the rule has 

performed successfully for a person in the past; 

The degree that the rule meshes or blends with other rules currently active in the 

person’s mind. 

Rules are organized according to a hierarchy beginning with the most general rule. 

Exceptions and special cases are organized beneath this top layer. Problems in 

selecting a rule can arise anywhere in this morass of general and specific rules 

competing for selection in a person’s mind. For ease of organization, the common 

RB mistakes can be organized into (a) use of a bad rule, and (b) misuse of a good 

rule. 

C.7.e.1.a. Use of a Bad Rule 

A Bad Rule is one where the rule itself is faulty for some reason. In this regard, 

because rules have two parts (1) matching the situation and (2) providing a line of 

action to solve the problem. A bad rule may be faulty in either of these two areas. 

This section describes some common mistakes based on application of bad rules. 

C.7.e.1.b. Misuse of a Good Rule 

A Good Rule is a rule that has been proven to be useful in a particular situation. 

Nonetheless, a person might choose the wrong rule for the situation because two 

rules are available that appear to match the situation but have very different required 

actions. This section deals with common mistakes people make selecting good rules 

that are wrong for the situation. 

C.7.e.2. KB Mistakes 

The human mind is a very powerful problem-solving machine capable of finding the 

“deep structure” of a problem (in KB-performance). In explaining the concept of 

deep structure, Dr. Schank (1982) refers to the similar themes of Romeo and Juliet and 

West Side Story. These are two very different stories, one about Renaissance Italy, the 

other about gang warfare in modern New York. But on a deeper level, they share the 

same structure. To discover this similarity, however, a person must mentally

summarize the plot lines and compare them – a KB-performance activity. KBperformance uses an enormous amount of mental resources, is slow, and happens in 

sequence (as opposed to RB-performance, were many RB rules might be active at 

one time). Perhaps even more frequently than with RB performance, people make 

mistakes while in KB-performance. For ease of organization, these mistakes can be 

organized into two categories: bias and heuristics. 

human mind is a “parallel processor” in that several rules can be “active” at the same 

time and competing with one another. A given rule’s success in winning in a person’s 

mind depends on several factors, including: 

The specificity of the rule, meaning that the more specifically a rule describes the 

current situation, the more likely it is to win; and 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 4: MARINE CASUALTY ANALYSIS

B4-21 

C.7.e.2.a. Heuristics 

A Heuristic is a mental “rule of thumb.” People often resort to the use of heuristics 

(mental rules of thumb) that help them to diagnose problems without expending too 

much mental effort and thus too much time. Often, these heuristics serve them well; 

however, they are shortcuts and as such mariners may be shortchanging themselves 

of adequate and accurate information. Rather than processing all available 

information and following reasoning to its most probable and logical end, taking of a 

shortcut may give a person a false understanding of the actual situation. Simply put, a 

heuristic is the mis-diagnosis or mis-reading of a novel situation. 

C.7.e.2.b. Bias 

A Bias is the tendency to apply a certain response regardless of the situation. Biases 

are fundamentally problems with how a person perceives the “problem space,” and 

what factors they choose to pay attention to. Simply put, a bias is an improper 

decision made (usually the same one) regardless of what the novel situation may be. 

C.7.f. Violations 

As a law enforcement agency, men and women of the Coast Guard tend to think of 

violations as any departure from binding law or regulation. While planning errors of 

the violation type may in fact relate to legal violations, marine investigators should 

not confuse the two while conducting human error analysis. Planning errors of the 

violation type are deliberate decisions to break established rules, plans, or procedures. 

Only in some cases (not all), those established rules, plans, or procedures have the 

force of law (ex: regulations, lawful orders, etc.). This section describes the most 

common ways in which people deliberately break rules, plans, or procedures. 

C.7.f.1. Routine Adaptation 

Definition: “Routine violations happen everyday as people regularly modify or do 

not strictly comply with work procedures, often because of poorly designed or 

defined work practices. Two factors seem important in shaping a person’s routine 

violation behavior: (a) the natural human tendency to take the path of least effort; 

and (b) a relatively indifferent or forgiving environment. In everyday life, if the 

quickest and easiest way to do something involves violating an apparently trivial rule 

or procedure that is rarely enforced/sanctioned, people will routinely violate that rule. 

The presence of this type of violation often indicates that the system itself could be 

better designed, keeping the operator in mind.” [Reason: 196] 

Example: Because landscape architects routinely lay out garden and park walkways 

on aesthetic grounds rather than according to how people will use the paths, people 

routinely violate the “stay on the paths” rule in order to walk the most direct route, 

leaving muddy diagonal tracks across the protected grassy areas. 

Summary: The defining characteristic of routine adaptation is that: i) there is an 

easier action to take than the prescribed action; ii) it is done with some frequency; and 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 4: MARINE CASUALTY ANALYSIS

B4-22 

Example: At the Chernobyl site, safety regulations were deliberately ignored and a 

safety test was carried too far, ultimately resulting in disaster. However, the goal of 

violating the safety regulations was not to commit a malevolent act, but actually to 

improve system safety through the test. 

Summary: The defining characteristic of exceptional adaptation is that: i) it is the 

product of local conditions; ii) they are very infrequent; and iii) the goal is to improve 

the situation.

C.7.f.3. Sabotage 

Definition: “Sabotage is deliberately violating a rule, law, regulation, or work 

practice with the knowledge that and explicit purpose of causing damage. In other 

words, the person commits a malevolent act.” [Reason: 195-6] 

Example: Engineers aboard the M/V ROTTERDAM, faced with maintenance 

problems generating large volumes of oily bilge water, decided to build a pipe that 

bypassed the oily water separator and discharged the oily bilge water directly 

overboard, which is a knowing discharge of oil into the waters of the United States 

and is, therefore, a criminal offense. The engineers were willing to violate these laws 

because their pay was based on keeping maintenance costs down in the engine room, 

and excessive operation of the oily water separator would have enormously inflated 

spare part costs (and driven bonuses down dramatically). 

Summary: The defining characteristic of sabotage is that the intent is to cause 

damage. 

C.8.

PRECONDITIONS 

LEADING TO HUMAN 

ERROR

In the final step of analyzing human error, the marine investigator considers the 

preconditions (related to the person) from the Causal Analysis that combined with 

the unsafe act or decision resulted in the accident. The many factors weighing on the 

person will have been detected, recorded, and organized during fact-finding using the 

SHEL model (see Figure B4-5). In practice, however, the marine investigator must 

direct considerable attention to explaining in the Conclusions how one or many of 

the SHEL factors led to the human error. 

C.9. CONCLUSIONS 

FOLLOWING HUMAN 

ERROR ANALYSIS

C.9.a. What do I do with the results of Human Error 

Analysis 

As with Causal Analysis, when Human Error Analysis is properly completed, the 

iii) the environment is forgiving. 

C.7.f.2. Exceptional Adaptation 

Definition: “In contrast to routine violations, an exceptional violation tends to be a 

one-time breach of a work practice. Typically these less defined types of violation 

result from “system double-binds” where it is impossible to follow one rule or 

procedure without violating another.” [Reason: 196] 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 4: MARINE CASUALTY ANALYSIS

results should lead to conclusions, and, then, to Safety Recommendations. Generally 

speaking, Execution Errors (having something to do with memory and attention) 

should lead to a conclusion that is a ‘memory jogger’ or ‘attention getter,’ such as a 

visible or audible alarm at some set point. Planning Errors should lead to a 

conclusion that deals with training, policy, or procedure. Or in some cases, (such as 

sabotage) an enforcement referral is appropriate. 

C.9.b. Human Error Analysis Graphic 

The following job aids will assist the marine investigator with the collection, 

sequencing, classification, and analysis of information. With the exception of 

witness/investigator statements and summaries of statements (which are evidence), 

the job aides below are considered to be “investigator’s notes” and should not be 

included in any files or records. The results of the notes should be included in the 

final Report of Investigation (ROI), as appropriate. 

D.2. LIST OF JOB 

AIDS U.S. Coast Guard Witness / Investigator Statement Form 

U.S. Coast Guard Summary of Statement Form 

SHEL Data Collection Interview Form 

Finding of Fact Timeline Worksheet 

D. JOB AIDS

D.1. INTRODUCTION

The following is a list of the job aids provided in Figures 1-12 of this chapter:

U.S. Coast Guard Witness / Investigator Statement Form Continuation Page 

U.S. Coast Guard Summary of Statement Form Continuation Page 

SHEL Data Collection Interview Form (back page) 

Part 1: Identify the Initiating Event, Subsequent Events, & Failed Defenses 

worksheet 

Part 1a: Identify the Subsequent Events & Failed Defenses (cont.) worksheet 

Part 2: Identify Production, Unsafe Acts/Decisions, & Failed Defenses worksheet 

Unsafe Act

or Decision 

Execution Error 

(Act)

Planning Error

(Decision)

Attention

Failure 

Memory

Failure 

Mistake 

Violation 

(Rule Based)

Misuse

Of a Good Rule 

Use of a

Bad Rule

B4-23 

(Knowledge Based)

Heuristics

Bias 

Routine Adaptation

Exceptional 

Adaptation 

Sabotage 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 4: MARINE CASUALTY ANALYSIS

B4-24 

D.3. JOB AIDS FOR 

THE COLLECTION OF 

INFORMATION 

The following job aids (Figure B4-1 through B4-6) are to assist the marine 

investigator in the collection of information necessary to generate a timeline. Their 

use is self-explanatory. 

U.S. Coast Guard Witness / Investigator Statement Form 

Part 3: Identify Workplace and Organization Factors & Failed Defenses worksheet 

Examples of Completed Job Aids 

U.S. Coast Guard Witness / Investigator Statement Form Continuation Page 

U.S. Coast Guard Summary of Statement Form 

U.S. Coast Guard Summary of Statement Form Continuation Page 

SHEL Data Collection Interview Form 

SHEL Data Collection Interview Form (back page) 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 4: MARINE CASUALTY ANALYSIS

Witness Name: Employer Name:

City/State/Zip: City/State/Zip:

Position: License/Doc. # 

I, the undersigned, make the following statement voluntarily, without threat, duress or promise of reward: 

SIGNATURE DATE

Page 1 of ____ 

FIGURE B4-1: U.S. COAST GUARD WITNESS / INVESTIGATOR STATEMENT FORM

U.S. COAST GUARD WITNESS / INVESTIGATOR STATEMENT FORM 

(Please Print Clearly) 

Street Address: Employer Address:

Phone No: Phone No:

I have read my statement as documented above (and, if applicable, on continuation pages), and to the best 

of my knowledge and belief, it is true and correct. 

B4-25 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 4: MARINE CASUALTY ANALYSIS

FIGURE B4-2: U.S. Coast Guard Witness / Investigator Statement Form Continuation Page 

U.S. COAST GUARD WITNESS / INVESTIGATOR 

(Please Print Clearly)

STATEMENT FORM CONTINUATION PAGE 

SIGNATURE DATE

Page ____ of ____

B4-26 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 4: MARINE CASUALTY ANALYSIS

Witness Name: Employer Name:

City/State/Zip: City/State/Zip:

Position: License/Doc. # 

SIGNATURE OF WITNESS DATE OF INTERVIEW

The above (and, if applicable, continuation page(s)) is an accurate and true summary of my interview with 

the above named witness. 

SIGNATURE OF INVESTIGATOR DATE OF INTERVIEW

Page 1 of ____

FIGURE B4-3: U.S. Coast Guard Summary of Statement Form 

U.S. COAST GUARD SUMMARY OF STATEMENT FORM 

(Please Print Clearly) 

Street Address: Employer Address:

Phone No: Phone No:

(OPTIONAL): I, the undersigned, have read the above summary of my statement and verify that it is 

complete and accurate: 

B4-27 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 4: MARINE CASUALTY ANALYSIS

FIGURE B4-4: U.S. Coast Guard Summary of Statement Form Continuation Page 

U.S. COAST GUARD SUMMARY OF 

STATEMENT FORM CONTINUATION PAGE 

(Please Print Clearly)

SIGNATURE OF INVESTIGATOR DATE OF INTERVIEW

SIGNATURE OF WITNESS (OPTIONAL) DATE OF INTERVIEW

Page ____ of ____

B4-28 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 4: MARINE CASUALTY ANALYSIS

FIGURE B4-5: SHEL Data Collection Interview Form

Collection

MISLE Activity #:

_______________

Name: ________________ 

• Physical Factors (height, 

weight, strength, etc) 

• Physiological Factors 

(health, drug and alcohol 

use, fatigue, nutrition, 

medical conditions, etc.) 

• Psychosocial Factors 

(personal relationships, 

marital difficulties,

money problems, etc.)

(Liveware 

Mismatch) Others

with issues between 

them and the 

Subject 

• Passenger 

Interaction 

• Crew

Interaction 

• Senior / 

Subordinate 

Interation

• Marine 

Environment 

• Internal 

Environment 

(Hardware 

Mismatch) 

Vessel, Facility, 

Equip. & Cargo 

• Workspace 

Factors

(Software 

Mismatch) 

Policy,

Procedures, 

Regs 

• Access / 

Format 

• Inadequate 

• Disabled 

• Removed 

• Nonexistant

SHEL Data 

Interview Form 

Date: 

_______________ 

(Liveware) Subject Person

 ID: ________________

• Psychological Factors 

(personality, attitude, 

biases, etc.) 

• Communication 

(Environment 

Mismatch) 

Surrounding 

atmosphere 

• Infrastructure

• Switches, 

controls, & 

displays

• Never 

present 

Notes (description of Incident)

Page ____ of ____

H

L

S L E

H

S E

H

S L E

B4-29 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 4: MARINE CASUALTY ANALYSIS

B4-30 

FIGURE B4-6: SHEL Data Collection Interview Form (Back Page) 

MISLE Activity #: _____________ Subject’s Name: _________________________ Date________________ 

Questions Answers 

Page ____ of ____
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 4: MARINE CASUALTY ANALYSIS

B4-31 

The following job aid (Figure B4-7) is to assist the marine investigator in the 

generation a timeline. Each distinct finding of fact that is gathered during the 

collection of information should be (as sequentially as possible) entered in the 

narrative section with a date/time assigned as well as the source of the information. 

Next the findings of fact are numbered (far left) and then classified by type as an 

action (A), event (E), or condition (C) in accordance with Enclosure 2. Further 

classification can be made by choosing and re-labeling the initiating event (IE), the 

subsequent events (SE1), and the unsafe acts/decisions (UA). Each finding of fact 

must represent a single action, event or condition. 

Finding of Fact Timeline Worksheet 

D.4. JOB AIDS FOR 

THE SEQUENCING AND 

CLASSIFICATION OF 

INFORMATION
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 4: MARINE CASUALTY ANALYSIS

B4-32 

FIGURE B4-7: Finding of Fact Timeline Worksheet 

MISLE Activity # Page _____ of 

_____ 

FF # Date/Time Narrative Class 

Findings of Fact Timeline 

Worksheet 

Source(s) 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 4: MARINE CASUALTY ANALYSIS

B4-33 

D.5. JOB AIDS FOR 

THE ANALYSIS OF 

INFORMATION

The following job aids (Figure B4-8 through B4-11) are to assist the marine 

investigator with the analysis of the organized information provided in the timeline. 

Lines should be drawn connecting the defense (failed or suggested) and the condition 

or action to which it relates for Part 2 and Part 3 below. Additional lines may be 

drawn to show ‘causal connection’ between related conditions/acts/decisions

between the different elements in the Model of Production. The worksheets below 

should be filled out in numerical order as listed. 

Part 1: Identify the Initiating Event, Subsequent Events, & Failed Defenses 

worksheet 

Part 1a: Identify the Subsequent Events & Failed Defenses (cont.) worksheet 

Part 2: Identify Production, Unsafe Acts/Decisions, & Failed Defenses worksheet 

Part 3: Identify Workplace and Organization Factors & Failed Defenses worksheet 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 4: MARINE CASUALTY ANALYSIS

FIGURE B4-8: Part 1: Identify the Initiating Event, Subsequent Events & Failed Defenses Worksheet In

i

t

i

a

t

i

n

g

Event

____________________

S

u

b

sequ

ent E

vent #1___________________

S

u

b

sequ

ent E

vent #2___________________

Part 1: Identify the Initiating Event, Subsequent Events, & Failed Defenses

S

u

b

sequ

ent E

vent #3___________________

S

u

b

sequ

ent E

vent #4___________________

Defense

Factors

Defense

Factors

Defense

Factors

Defense

Factors

B4-34 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 4: MARINE CASUALTY ANALYSIS

FIGURE B4-9: Part 1a: Identify the Subsequent Events & Failed Defenses (cont) Worksheet 

B4-35 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 4: MARINE CASUALTY ANALYSIS

FIGURE B4-10: Part 2: Identify Production, Unsafe Acts/Decisions, and Failed Defenses 

Preconditions Production

____________

Unsafe Acts

Or Decisions

Defense

Factors

Defense

Factors

Part 2: Identify Production, Unsafe Acts/Decisions, and Failed Defenses

I

nitia

tin

g

Eve

n

t

____________________

B4-36 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 4: MARINE CASUALTY ANALYSIS

FIGURE B4-11: Part 3: Identify Workplace and Organizational Factors & Failed Defenses Worksheet 

Organization

Factors (Decision Makers)

Workplace

Factors (Line Managers)

Defense

Factors

Part 3: Identify Workplace and Organization Factors and Failed Defenses

Defense

Factors

Part 2 Part 1

Completed during:

Initia

tin

g E

v

e

n

t

Def

e

n

se F

act

o

r

s

P

rodu

c

tion

Def

e

n

se F

act

o

r

s

Preco

n

ditio

n

s

B4-37 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 4: MARINE CASUALTY ANALYSIS

B4-38 

D.6. EXAMPLES OF 

COMPLETED JOB AIDS

 The completed job aids provided in Figure B4-12 will provide the marine 

investigator with examples of properly filled out job aids to refer to when conducting 

investigations of marine casualties. 

NOTE: The example investigation and completed job aids do not represent a fully 

completed investigation with fully completed job aids. Their sole purpose is to 

display the intended use of each of the job aids. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 4: MARINE CASUALTY ANALYSIS

FIGURE B4-12: Example of Completed Job Aids 

U.S. COAST GUARD WITNESS / INVESTIGATOR STATEMENT FORM 

(Please Print Clearly)

Witness Name: Chuck Barbee Employer Name: N/A

Street Address: 2100 2nd Street, S.W. Employer Address: N/A

City/State/Zip: Nowhere, MD12345 City/State/Zip: N/A

Phone No: (340) 555-1212 Phone No: N/A

Position: Passenger License/Doc. # N/A

I, the undersigned, make the following statement voluntarily, without threat, duress or promise of

reward: 

I went on a SCUBAtrip with Capt Dave on the M/V ICHABOD on Sept 8, 2003. We

left the Waterfront pier at 1:00 p.m. At about 2:00 p.m., it started raining really

hard, sowe didn’t do the second dive and started heading back to the pier. Capt

Dave saw that I was freezing and being pelted with heavy rain, and

increased speed the all the way. We took a direct route tothe pier, going

between a cruiseship pier and some pilings. Then I saw the steering station explode

and that is the last thing that I remember until I woke up in the hospital.

I have read my statement as documented above (and, if applicable, on continuation pages), and to 

the best of my knowledge and belief, it is true and correct. 

Charles B. Barbee September 10, 2003 

SIGNATURE DATE Page 1 of __1_

B4-39 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 4: MARINE CASUALTY ANALYSIS

U.S. COAST GUARD SUMMARY OF STATEMENT FORM

(Please Print Clearly) 

Witness Name: Scott Budka Employer Name: C/S TROPICAL

Street Address: via 6 Overseas Employer Address: 213423 DonowMuch

City/State/Zip: 34127 Trieste, Italy City/State/Zip: San Juan, PR 12345 

Phone No: (340) 555-1212 Phone No: (787) 555-1212 

Position: Safety Officer License/Doc. # 32342343234 

Scott Budka was overseeing the safety aspects of mooring the C/S

TROPICAL on September 7, 2003 at 0800. As usual, the vessel secured 

the bowline toa mooring dolphin approx. 20 yards from the end of the

City Pier. They come in and moor up this way every week during the

year. At night a light beacon is suspended from the bowline for

illumination.

(OPTIONAL): I, the undersigned, have read the above summary of my statement and verify that it

is complete and accurate:

Scott Budka September 9, 2003 

SIGNATURE OF WITNESS DATE OF INTERVIEW

The above (and, if applicable, continuation page(s)) is an accurate and true summary of my

interview with the above named witness.

Timothy Farley 09SEP03 

SIGNATURE OF INVESTIGATOR DATE OF INTERVIEW Page 1 of ___1_ 

B4-40 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 4: MARINE CASUALTY ANALYSIS

B4-41 

SHEL Data 

Collection

Date: 

___09 SEP 03___ 

MISLE Activity #:

___1234567___

(Liveware) Subject Person

Name: ___Ken Olsen____

 ID: _Lic# 654321____

• Physical Factors (height, 

weight, strength, etc) 

• Physiological Factors 

(health, drug and alcohol 

use, fatigue, nutrition, 

medical conditions, etc.) 

• Psychological Factors 

(personality, attitude, 

biases, etc.) 

(Liveware 

Mismatch) Others

with issues between 

them and the 

Subject 

• Communication 

• Crew

Interaction 

• Senior / 

Subordinate 

Interation

(Environment 

Mismatch) 

Surrounding 

atmosphere 

• Marine 

Environment 

• Internal 

Environment 

• Infrastructure

Vessel, Facility, 

Equip. & Cargo 

• Switches, 

controls, & 

displays

(Software 

Mismatch) 

Policy,

Procedures, 

Regs 

• Inadequate 

• Disabled 

• Never 

present 

• Nonexistant

Notes (description of Incident and other issues)

Approx 5’2” of average build. Has 25 yrs of sea time as a Chief Engineer. He had two years of 

experience as Chief Engineer onboard the C/S TROPICAL. Mr. Olsen happened to be close friends with 

Mr. Deaver for at Least 5 years. During this incident... Mr. Olsen was wrote the procedures for 

making the mooring line more visible when securing them to a mooring dolphin. The procedures 

addressed...

Page __1__ of __2__

Interview Form 

• Psychosocial Factors 

(personal relationships, 

marital difficulties,

money problems, etc.)

• Passenger 

Interaction 

(Hardware 

Mismatch) 

• Workspace 

Factors

• Access / 

Format 

• Removed 

H

L

S L E

H

S E

H

S L E
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 4: MARINE CASUALTY ANALYSIS

B4-42 

MISLE Activity #: ___1234567___ Subject’s Name: _____ Ken Olsen_________ Date:__09 SEP 03___ 

Questions Answers 

Are you aware of Mr. Deaver ever having No

used illegal drugs? 

Do you normally hang any type of No

illuminating device from the line in the 

day time: like a small float?

Page __2__ of __2__
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 4: MARINE CASUALTY ANALYSIS

B4-43 

MISLE Activity # 1234567 Page __1__ of __2__ 

FF # Date/Time Narrative Class 

5 07JUL98/0900 The M/V ICHABOD is an Uninspected Small 

Passenger Vsl 

C 

6 30AUG03/0930 David Deaver was the master. C 

10 08SEP03/1300 M/V ICHABOD departed Charlotte Amalie 

Waterfront pier w/1 passenger. 

E/C 

11 08SEP03/1400 It began to rain heavily and strong winds picked 

up w/little visibility

C 

12 08SEP03/1401 Deaver decided to end the trip. A 

13 08SEP03/1402 Deaver began steering a course back to the pier. A 

14 08SEP03/1410 The passenger was getting very cold. C 

15 08SEP03/1411 Deaver increased speed to maximum. A (U) 

7 07SEP03/0800 The C/S TROPICAL (small cruiseship) moored at 

the City Pier.

E 

8 07SEP03/0900 The bowline was secured to a mooring dolphin 

approx. 20 yards off the pier. 

C 

16 08SEP03/1430 Deaver decided to navigate between the pier and the 

dolphin. 

A (U) 

9 07SEP03/0901 The bowline was slack with a catenary that hung 

just above the horizon. 

C 

17 08SEP03/1431 Neither Deaver nor the passenger saw the mooring 

line. 

Findings of Fact Timeline 

Worksheet 

Source(s) 

MISLE Ref Data 

Barbee Statement 

Barbee Statement 

Barbee Statement 

Barbee Statement 

Barbee Statement 

Barbee Statement 

Barbee Statement 

Budka Sum 

Statement 

Budka Sum 

Statement 

Barbee Statement 

My Statement

My Statement C 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 4: MARINE CASUALTY ANALYSIS

B4-44 

MISLE Activity # 1234567 Findings of Fact 

Timeline Worksheet 

Page __2__ of __2__ 

FF 

# 

Date/Time Narrative Source(s) Class 

18 08SEP03/1435-0 The M/V ICHABOD hit the bowline. Bystander Statement E (IE)

19 08SEP03/1435-1 The piloting station of the M/V 

ICHABOD was completely destroyed. 

Bystander Statement E (SE1)

20 08SEP03/1435-2 Deaver was decapitated and killed 

instantly. 

Bystander Statement E (SE2)

21 08SEP03/1435-3 The M/V ICHABOD went out of control. Bystander Statement E (SE3)

22 08SEP03/1435-4 The M/V ICHABOD allided with the C/S 

TROPICAL. 

Bystander Statement E (SE4)

23 08SEP03/1435-5 The passenger was thrown from the M/V 

ICHABOD 

Bystander Statement E (SE5)

24 08SEP03/1439 The C/S TROPICAL personnel provided 

response/medical assistance. 

Master C/S Statement A 

27 15SEP03/1300 Deaver tested positive for cocaine. Autopsy Report C 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 4: MARINE CASUALTY ANALYSIS

Initiating Event ICHABOD hit mooring li

ne

Subsequent Event #1 pilot st

ation dest

r

oyed

Subsequent Event #2 Deaver decapitated

Part 1: Identify the Initiating Event, Subsequent Events, & Failed Defenses Subsequent Event #3 ICH

ABOD l

ost cont

r

ol

Subsequent Event #4 ICHABOD allided w/ C/

S

Defense

Factors

Defense

Factors

Defense

Factors

Defense

Factors

• Stronger 

material

• Breakaway design

• Auto

‘kill’

switch when 

the wheel is

released

• Prior

notice of the

hazard:

visible/ 

audible

indicator

• Required 

armor

• Same auto

‘kill’

switch

previously

mentioned

B4-45 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 4: MARINE CASUALTY ANALYSIS

Defense

Factors

Subsequent Event # 5 Passenger was t

hr

own

Subsequent Event # ___________________

Subsequent Event # ___________________Subsequent Event # ___________________

Subsequent Event # 4 I

CHABOD alli

dedC/

S

Part 1a: Identify the Subsequent Events & Failed Defenses (cont.)

Defense

Factors

Defense

Factors

Defense

Factors

• Passenger 

securing

device

similar to

seatbelts

B4-46 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 4: MARINE CASUALTY ANALYSIS

Preconditions Production

_Navigating__

Unsafe Acts 

Or Decisions

Initiating Event ICHABOD hit mooring li

ne

Defense

Factors

Part 2: Identify Production, Unsafe Acts/Decisions, and Failed Defenses

• Policy re: speed 

during adverse

visibility/ weather 

conditions

• Policy re: 

Navigating between a

pier and a mooring

dolphin

• Procedures re: 

placing some sort of

visible or audible

marker on low

hanging lines.

Especially during

periods of reduced 

visibility.

• Drug testing

program

• Increase speed

• Steer between the

pier and the

mooring dolphin

• Weather

• Cold passenger

• Bowline location

w/catenary

• Visibility

• Possible drug

influence

• Deaver was a new 

employee to the

company

Defense

Factors

B4-47 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 4: MARINE CASUALTY ANALYSIS

Organization

Factors (Decision Makers)

Workplace

Factors (Line Managers)

Defense

Factors

Part 3: Identify Workplace and Organization Factors and Failed Defenses

Defense

Factors

Part 2 Part 1

Completed during:

• CG

regulatory

spot checks to

ensure

compliance

on UPVs

• No written 

procedures on

vessel

• CG

regulatory

spot checks to

ensure

compliance

on UPV

companies

• CEO has

‘old

fashioned’

attitude with

re: towritten 

policy

I

nitiating Event

Defense Factors

Production

Defense Factors

Preconditions

B4-48 
USCG Marine Safety Manual 

Volume V: Investigations and Enforcement

PART B: INVESTIGATION

Chapter Five: 

Violation Analysis
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 5: VIOLATION ANALYSIS 

B5-i 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

A. GENERAL ................................... 1

A.1. DRAWING OF LEGAL CONCLUSIONS.................................................................................................................................1

A.2. MINIMUM CONTENT OF VIOLATION ANALYSIS NECESSARY PRIOR TO TAKING ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS.......................1

A.3. STEPS IN VIOLATION ANALYSIS.......................................................................................................................................1

B. STEP ONE: IDENTIFY LAWS AND REGULATIONS IN FORCE 

TO DETERMINE JURISDICTION ........................ 1

B.1. ELEMENTS OF A LAW OR REGULATION ............................................................................................................................1

B.2. JURISDICTIONAL ELEMENTS..............................................................................................................................................1

B.2.a. General.....................................................................................................................................................................1

B.2.b. Jurisdiction over a Person or Organization.............................................................................................................2

B.2.c. Jurisdiction over Geographical Locations ...............................................................................................................2

B.2.d. Jurisdiction over Subject Matter ..............................................................................................................................2

B.3. FACTUAL ELEMENTS ........................................................................................................................................................2

C. STEP TWO: IDENTIFY PEOPLE AND ORGANIZATIONS 

INVOLVED ...................................... 3

C.1. INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................................................................................3

C.2. PROOF OF PERSON INVOLVED...........................................................................................................................................3

C.3. IDENTIFICATION ...............................................................................................................................................................3

C.3.a. Address and Phone...................................................................................................................................................3

C.3.b. Vessel Official Numbers...........................................................................................................................................3

C.3.c. Property Ownership Records...................................................................................................................................3

C.4. CORPORATIONS AND SUBSIDIARIES..................................................................................................................................3

D. STEP THREE: CONSIDER HUMAN ERROR ............. 4

D.1. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................................................4

D.2. HUMAN ERROR AS DIRECT VIOLATION OF LAW OR REGULATION ...................................................................................4

D.3. HUMAN ERROR AS NEGLIGENCE......................................................................................................................................4

D.3.a. General ....................................................................................................................................................................4

D.3.b. Further Research on Negligence .............................................................................................................................5

D.3.c. Gross Negligence .....................................................................................................................................................5

D.4. HUMAN ERROR AS MISCONDUCT.....................................................................................................................................6

D.4.a. General ....................................................................................................................................................................6

D.5. HUMAN ERROR AS PROFESSIONAL INCOMPETENCE .........................................................................................................6

D.6. CONSIDER OMISSIONS......................................................................................................................................................6

D.7. SUBSTITUTION TEST.........................................................................................................................................................6

D.8. DEGREES OF CULPABILITY FLOW CHART AND HUMAN ERROR TO OFFENSE MATRIX ......................................................7

D.8.a. Degrees of Culpability Flow Chart..........................................................................................................................7

D.8.b. Human Error to Offense Matrix...............................................................................................................................8

E. STEP FOUR: REFER VIOLATIONS FOR APPROPRIATE 

ENFORCEMENT ................................... 8

E.1. GENERAL..........................................................................................................................................................................8

E.2. ENFORCEMENT REFERRALS IN MISLE.............................................................................................................................8
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 5: VIOLATION ANALYSIS 

B5-ii 

F. SELECTED LAWS APPLICABLE IN THE MARITIME REALM ... 9

F.1. INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................................................................9

F.2. SPECIAL MARITIME AND TERRITORIAL JURISDICTION ......................................................................................................9

F.2.a. General.....................................................................................................................................................................9

F.2.b. Definition..................................................................................................................................................................9

F.3. OVERVIEW OF SELECTED CRIMINAL LAWS.....................................................................................................................10

F.4. OBSTRUCTION OF BOARDING..........................................................................................................................................10

F.5. CUSTOMS LAWS..............................................................................................................................................................10

F.5.a. General...................................................................................................................................................................10

F.5.b. Smuggling into Foreign Nations.............................................................................................................................11

F.5.c. Hidden Compartments............................................................................................................................................11

F.6 STOLEN VESSELS .............................................................................................................................................................11

F.6.a. Applicable Federal Statutes....................................................................................................................................11

F.6.b. Related Crimes.......................................................................................................................................................11

F.7. VIOLENT ACTS................................................................................................................................................................12

F.8. VIOLENT ACTS WITHIN THE SMTJ..................................................................................................................................12

F.8.a. Murder within the SMTJ.........................................................................................................................................12

F.8.b. Manslaughter within the SMTJ................................................................................................................................12

F.8.c. Aggravated Sexual Abuse within the SMTJ. ...........................................................................................................13

F.8.d. Assault within the SMTJ. ........................................................................................................................................13

F.9. FIREARMS LAWS.............................................................................................................................................................13

F.10. FALSE DISTRESS CALLS................................................................................................................................................14

F.11. FALSE OFFICIAL STATEMENTS AND FALSE DOCUMENTS ..............................................................................................14

F.12. INTERSTATE FLIGHT TO AVOID PROSECUTION OR GIVING TESTIMONY ........................................................................14

F.13. BRIBERY OF A PUBLIC OFFICIAL...................................................................................................................................14

F.14. NEUTRALITY ACT.........................................................................................................................................................14

F.15. PROPERTY CRIMES OTHER THAN STOLEN VESSELS ......................................................................................................14

F.16. SCUTTLING OR INTENTIONAL DAMAGE TO VESSELS.....................................................................................................15

F.16.a. Conspiracy to Destroy Vessels.............................................................................................................................15

F.16.b. Destruction by the Owner.....................................................................................................................................15

F.16.c. Destruction by Non-owner....................................................................................................................................15

F.16.d. Destruction or Misuse of Vessel by the Person-in-Charge...................................................................................15 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 5: VIOLATION ANALYSIS 

B5-1 

A.1. DRAWING OF 

LEGAL CONCLUSIONS 

A.2. MINIMUM 

CONTENT OF 

VIOLATION ANALYSIS 

NECESSARY PRIOR TO 

TAKING ENFORCEMENT 

ACTIONS

At a minimum, IOs must indicate: 

• Which law or regulation may have been violated; 

• The jurisdictional elements of that law or regulation; 

• The facts of the case with evidence of each jurisdictional element; 

• The factual elements of that law or regulation; 

• The facts of the case with evidence of each factual element; and

• The person or organization culpable for the possible violation. 

A.3. STEPS IN 

VIOLATION ANALYSIS

In general, the IO should complete the following 5 step process in analyzing 

possible violations of law and regulation: 

Step One: Identify Laws and Regulations in Force to Determine Jurisdiction 

Step Two: Identify the People and Organizations Involved 

Step Three: Consider Human Error (including omissions) 

Step Four: Ensure there is Evidence for Each Factual and Jurisdictional 

Element; and

B.1. ELEMENTS OF 

A LAW OR 

REGULATION

B.2.

JURISDICTIONAL 

ELEMENTS

B.2.a. General 

A. GENERAL

IOs may not draw legal conclusions in an ROI. Phraseology such as “Mr. Mitchell 

violated 33 CFR 124.4” or “Mr. Mitchell violated no law,” is to be strictly 

avoided. With regard to violations, ROIs are to summarize factual information 

for presentation as evidence that a person or corporation may have violated a 

certain law or regulation. Final determinations regarding possible violations are 

determined by Federal Courts, Administrative Law Judges, and Hearing Officers. 

Throughout this Volume, the term violation will be used for the term ‘alleged’ 

violation. 

Step Five: Refer Violations for Appropriate Enforcement. 

B. STEP ONE: IDENTIFY LAWS AND REGULATIONS IN FORCE 

TO DETERMINE JURISDICTION

All laws and regulations are composed of two basic sets of elements: the 

jurisdictional elements governing where and to whom the law applies; and the 

factual elements governing the acts or conditions involved. To determine whether 

a given law or regulation was in force at the time of an incident, the IO must 

evaluate the jurisdictional elements of that law or regulation. 

Jurisdictional elements are those facts as defined in a statute that must exist before 

the federal government, including the Coast Guard, can properly take action for 

violation of that statute. Jurisdiction is generally limited in terms of specific people 

or organizations, specific geographical locations, or specific subject matter. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 5: VIOLATION ANALYSIS 

B5-2 

B.2.b. Jurisdiction over a Person or Organization 

B.2.c. Jurisdiction over Geographical Locations 

Jurisdiction over a person or organization is frequently limited by means of the 

person’s geographic location at the time of the incident. Most of the laws and 

regulations enforced on foreign entities (foreign vessels, merchant seamen, owners 

and operators) apply only on the U.S. territorial sea, for instance. Another 

particularly important example is that many federal criminal laws that the Coast 

Guard enforces are only applicable in what is known as the “Special Maritime and 

Territorial Jurisdiction” (SMTJ). See Section G.2 below, 18 USC 7, and 33 CFR 

2.05-1(b). In determining whether a given regulation or statute was in force, IOs 

must assure that the statute applies at the geographic location where the incident 

occurred. Key elements to consider include whether the incident occurred: 

• Entirely on the internal waters of a state; 

• On the Great Lakes; 

• On a federal reservation; 

• On the navigable waters of the United States 

• Within the territorial sea 

• On or in connection with the Outer Continental Shelf; and 

B.2.d. Jurisdiction over Subject Matter 

B.3. FACTUAL 

ELEMENTS

Jurisdiction over a person or organization must be established by demonstrating 

that the person or organization in question was governed by the law or regulation 

in question at the time of the incident. Most statutes enumerate the roles of 

specific individuals or organizations to which it applies, as owner, operator, 

master, pilot, person in charge, etc. In determining whether a given regulation or 

statute was in force, IOs must assure that the statute applies to the people or 

organizations involved. 

• Within the Exclusive Economic Zone.

Jurisdiction over a person or organization is also frequently limited by means of 

the operations being performed. Many statutes, for instance, apply only while a 

given operation, such as transfer of bulk oil products, is ongoing. In determining 

whether a given regulation or statute was in force, IOs must assure that the statute 

applies to specific subject matter involved. 

Factual elements are those facts as defined in a statute that establish a 

circumstance, event, or action as it actually takes or took place. Factual elements 

in statutes and regulations may either specify required actions or conditions, or 

may forbid an action or condition. Factual elements are not relevant in 

determining whether a law or regulation was in force; instead they determine

whether a violation occurred. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 5: VIOLATION ANALYSIS 

B5-3 

C.1.

INTRODUCTION

C.2. PROOF OF 

PERSON INVOLVED

Evidence of the individual’s role as owner, operator, or person directing the 

movement of the vessel is extremely important. It is important to have evidence 

in the file as to who the actual owner/operator of the vessel was at the time of the 

violation. Examples of proof of identify can include but are not limited to:

• Copy of vessel’s documentation; 

• Copies of vessel’s log entries/ship’s papers; 

• Copies of a person’s license (if required for the job they were 

performing); or 

C.3.

IDENTIFICATION

C.3.a. Address and Phone 

C.3.b. Vessel Official Numbers 

C.3.c. Property Ownership Records 

C. STEP TWO: IDENTIFY PEOPLE AND ORGANIZATIONS 

INVOLVED

To establish jurisdiction over a person or organization, the IO must accurately 

identify who was involved. Further, for any subsequent enforcement action to be 

effective contact information for that person or organization must be complete 

and accurate. 

• A witness’ statement as to the role of the individuals on board.

Locating and providing a current address and phone number for an 

owner/operator can be difficult, particularly when dealing with abandoned vessels, 

smaller commercial fishing vessels, etc. Consider the resources in this section for 

detailing the person or organization culpable.

State and Official Numbers can be traced back through state boating law 

administrators or MISLE.

Culpable individuals can often be identified by determining the vessel/facility 

owners/operators, marina operators, harbormasters, customers, and owners of the 

property on which abandoned vessels are located. Many of these records can be 

found through state boating law administrators or MISLE. 

C.4.

CORPORATIONS AND 

SUBSIDIARIES

The legal relationship between corporations, divisions, and subsidiaries can be 

extremely complex. In determining who the involved person or organization is, 

IOs must be sensitive to these complex relationships. While MISLE contains 

some of this “parent-child” information, IOs should refer to external resources 

including Data Universal Numbering System Numbers (DUNS Number). The 

DUNS Number is Dunn & Bradstreet's distinctive nine-digit identification 

sequence. The DUNS Number is an internationally recognized common company 

identifier in global electronic commerce transactions. Since each location of a 

business may have its own unique DUNS Number, a large organization is likely to 

have many different DUNS Numbers within its corporate "family." DUNS 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 5: VIOLATION ANALYSIS 

B5-4 

D.1.

INTRODUCTION

D.2. HUMAN ERROR 

AS DIRECT 

VIOLATION OF LAW 

OR REGULATION

D.3. HUMAN ERROR 

AS NEGLIGENCE

D.3.a. General 

Numbers link parents, subsidiaries, headquarters and branches on more than 62 

million corporate family members around the world. The DUNS number is 

unique identifier that should be captured in the MISLE party details for the 

organization, it is also extremely useful for the collection of debt. 

D. STEP THREE: CONSIDER HUMAN ERROR

Human error is a predictable part of the Marine Transportation System. When 

performing violation analysis, the IO must be alert to human errors such as: 1) an 

act expressly prohibited in a law or regulation; and/or 2) an act of professional 

incompetence, misconduct, or negligence. The term “human error” applies to a 

wide variety of human behaviors, as described in Chapter B4 of this volume. Skillbased errors, for instance, are significantly different from knowledge-based errors. 

Human error encompasses decisions and actions. In some instances, the action 

performed in error (unintended or willful) will be directly prohibited by law or 

regulation. In such cases, regardless of intent, the error should be treated as a 

violation of that regulation or law. The intent of the person involved, however, is 

relevant in assessing the appropriate level of enforcement. See Part C of this 

Volume. 

Most casualties involve some form of human errors. In determining if the human 

rise to the level of negligence IO’s should look to the definition of negligence in 

46 CFR 5.29: Negligence is the commission of an act which a reasonable and 

prudent person of the same station, under the same circumstances, would not 

commit, or the failure to perform an act which a reasonable and prudent person of 

the same station, under the same circumstances, would not fail to perform. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 5: VIOLATION ANALYSIS 

B5-5 

D.3.b. Further Research on Negligence 

• IOs should be aware of the following in evaluating whether human error 

constitutes negligence: 

• The presumption of negligence arises when a vessel grounds on a 

submerged object even if the precise location is unknown (CDOA 2113; 

HINDS). 

• Vessels are presumed not to run aground in the ordinary course when 

operated by careful navigators (CDOA 1200; RICHARDS) 

• When a vessel grounds in a place where it has no business being under the 

commonly accepted dictates of piloting and good seamanship, the 

presumption of fault arises on the part of the person piloting. (CDOA 

2133; SANDLIN CDOA 2382; NILSEN CDOA 2409 

PLACZKIEWICZ) 

A “Strong” presumption of negligence arises when evidence is submitted that the 

respondent was operating a vessel which struck a stationary object: 

• When a drifting vessel or vessel under its own power allides with an 

anchored vessel or a navigational structure, the burden of proving the 

absence of fault or inevitable accident rests with the moving vessel. 

(Schoenbaum, Thomas J. ADMIRALTY AND MARITIME LAW sect. 

13-2) 

D.3.c. Gross Negligence

• In CDOA 2217 (QUINN), Commandant upheld an administrative law 

judge (ALJ) finding of negligence, in that as operator of a tow with barges, 

the respondent failed to navigate the tow so as to “preclude the barges she 

was pushing from colliding with various moored vessels. The 

Commandant held that “allisions of the sort which occurred in this case do 

not ordinarily occur unless the vessel has been mismanaged in some way”. 

Gross negligence is the highest form of negligence, in which a conscious or 

voluntary act is performed in reckless disregard of both legal duty and 

consequences. While gross negligence is commonly used to refer to instances 

where a person has taken no care, it actually is a failure to take the minimum (i.e., 

non-expert) precautions an ordinary person would take. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 5: VIOLATION ANALYSIS 

B5-6 

D.4. HUMAN ERROR 

AS MISCONDUCT

D.4.a. General 

D.5. HUMAN ERROR 

AS PROFESSIONAL 

INCOMPETENCE 

D.6. CONSIDER 

OMISSIONS

D.7.

SUBSTITUTION TEST

When an action, intentional or not, error or not, violates a duly established rule, 

that action is misconduct. While most commonly associated with willful, 

voluntary, and intentional actions by a person such as intoxication or failure to 

join, misconduct need not include these elements. NOTE: Often in the 

Suspension and Revocation (S&R) process, cases might involve both misconduct 

and a violation of law. IO’s should contact their servicing legal office if in doubt 

about a particular charge,. See Part C of this Volume for more information. 

When an action, intentional or not, error or not, demonstrates that a credential 

holding mariner lacks even the basic knowledge and skills required to obtain that 

credential, that act should be considered a violation. In considering human error 

as professional incompetence, the IO must rely upon the credential issuing 

standards of the credential-issuing government and the international STCW 

provisions. 

In performing violation analysis, the IO must also be alert for specific actions 

which a mariner or other person: 1) was explicitly required to perform by law or 

regulation, but which they failed to perform; or 2) was required by standards of 

professional competence, formalized (non-regulatory) rule, or accepted standards 

of attention to duty, but which they failed to perform. In these cases, the failure to 

take an action or make a judgment may be considered a violation, just as taking an 

action would.

The ‘substitution test’ is conducted to determine if a specific act or decision is 

something that any person of the same station (same position, qualifications, etc.) 

would do in the same situation. This involves asking a person of the same station 

that if given the same prevailing circumstances (conditions, type and size of vessel, 

operation, etc.) what they would do. This should be conducted in an ‘open-ended’ 

fashion without providing information as to exactly what happened or using a 

“would you do this – yes or no?” questioning technique. After receiving 

information about what the person of the same station would do, then you may 

state what actually happened and ask if the person of the same station would have 

done the same. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 5: VIOLATION ANALYSIS 

D.8. DEGREES OF 

CULPABILITY FLOW 

CHART AND HUMAN 

ERROR TO OFFENSE 

MATRIX

D.8.a. Degrees of Culpability Flow Chart 

The following flow chart is provided SOLELY to guide the IO in determining the 

level of culpability that a person or organization may have following an incident. 

The IO is cautioned that regardless of where a person falls within the ‘degrees’ of 

culpability some law, regulations, and/or policy may still require specific 

enforcement action. This tool will help in the preliminary assessment of the level 

of enforcement action taken in Part C of this Volume. 

Were actions

as intended?

Unauthorized

substance

involved?

Knowingly

violating

procedures?

Passed a

substitution

test?

History of

unsafe acts 

/decisions?

Were

procedures

available, 

workable,

intelligible, and

correct?

Sabotage,

malevolent 

damage, etc

Substance

abuse without 

mitigation

Substance

abuse with

mitigation

Possible

reckless

violation

Possible

negligent 

error

Possible

system

induced error

Blameless

error, but 

training,

counselling,

or other 

corrective 

measure is

necessary

Blameless

error that

may still 

require

some

additional 

action

Was there a

medical

condition?

Were

consequences

as intended?

Were there 

deficiencies in

training,

selection, or 

experience?

YES

YES

YES

YES YES

YES

YES

NO NO NO

NO

NO

NO

NO

NO

YES

YES

Line depicting

increasing degree

of culpability

NO

B5-7 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 5: VIOLATION ANALYSIS 

B5-8 

D.8.b. Human Error to Offense Matrix 

The following Human Error to Offense Matrix is provided to assist the IO in 

ensuring that the human error analysis and violation analysis are consistent. If the 

results differ, one of the analysis processes may need to be reviewed/revised. This 

also assists by identifying which offense a given error might rise to. The IO is 

cautioned that not all errors are offenses, and this matrix suggests no such 

automatic correlation. 

OFFENSE TYPE 

ERROR 

 TYPE 

Professional 

Incompetence

Misconduct Violation of 

Law / Reg 

Negligence 

Skill Based 

Inattention X 

Mistiming X 

Rule Based 

Misapplication 

of a Good Rule 

X X 

Use of a Bad 

Rule 

X X X 

Knowledge 

Based 

Bias X 

Heuristics X 

Violations 

Routine 

Adaptation 

X X X 

Exceptional 

Adaptation 

X X X 

Sabotage X X X 

E.1. GENERAL

E.2. ENFORCEMENT 

REFERRALS IN 

MISLE 

E. STEP FOUR: REFER VIOLATIONS FOR APPROPRIATE 

ENFORCEMENT

Once the analysis is complete, violations should be referred for enforcement 

evaluation and appropriate action. The ROI SHOULD NOT CONCLUDE that 

a violation did or did not occur. Instead, having met the thresholds for evidence 

suggested above, the IO should report only that there is evidence of the specific 

violation warranting further enforcement evaluation. 

As a matter of policy, IOs will document all notifications of violations from the 

public in a MISLE notification record. Otherwise, when a violation is detected 

during the course of a Coast Guard activity, it shall be document in that relevant 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 5: VIOLATION ANALYSIS 

B5-9 

F.1.

INTRODUCTION

F.2. SPECIAL 

MARITIME AND 

TERRITORIAL 

JURISDICTION

F.2.a. General 

F.2.b. Definition 

The SMTJ term is a challenge to define clearly and accurately in all circumstances. 

For the purposes of this section, the following guidelines define the SMTJ. The 

SMTJ applies to: 

• A U.S. flag vessel outside the jurisdiction of any state (seaward of the U.S. 

territorial sea), including such vessels located in foreign waters; 

• A U.S. flag vessel located on the waters of the Great Lakes or any of the 

waters connecting them; 

• Lands within exclusive federal jurisdiction on federal reservations, as well 

as land outside the jurisdiction of any nation (e.g., Antarctica) with respect 

to an offense by or against a national of the U.S.; 

• U.S. flag aircraft while in flight over waters seaward of state waters, and 

may also apply with respect to those flying over waters seaward of the high 

water line along the coast and seaward of harbor works or narrow 

promontories (thus bringing in the majority of the state waters along the 

Atlantic, Pacific, Gulf, and Great Lakes coasts); and 

• Offenses by or against U.S. nationals committed outside the jurisdiction of 

any nation. 

In view of the complexity in the SMTJ, IOs should contact their servicing legal 

office to discuss the issues should SMTJ jurisdiction come into question. 

‘detection’ activity. Direct entry of enforcement activities without record of the 

underlying investigation/detection activity is expressly prohibited. 

F. SELECTED LAWS APPLICABLE IN THE MARITIME REALM

IOs must document and take appropriate action on all violations or suspected

violations of federal law in the maritime realm. This section addresses a number 

of laws applicable in the maritime environment of which all IOs should be aware. 

These laws are an important enforcement responsibility and in some cases will 

require significant or immediate attention. Duty attorneys are available at all 

district legal offices and should be contacted when necessary to assist. 

Certain federal statutes, including a number of those addressed in this section, 

contain special terms delineating where and to whom they apply. One particularly 

important example is that many federal criminal laws that the Coast Guard

enforces are only applicable in what is known as the “Special Maritime and 

Territorial Jurisdiction” (SMTJ). See 18 USC 7 and 33 CFR 2.05-1(b). 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 5: VIOLATION ANALYSIS 

B5-10 

F.3. OVERVIEW OF 

SELECTED CRIMINAL 

LAWS

A felony is any criminal law whose maximum potential penalty exceeds one year of 

imprisonment. Misdemeanors are all less serious federal crimes. Classification as 

a felony or misdemeanor depends upon the maximum penalty provisions of the 

statute, not the actual sentence adjudged. This section addresses the following 

categories of offenses the IO should strongly pursue should evidence of same be 

encountered:

• Obstruction of Boardings; 

• Customs Laws; 

• Stolen Vessels; 

• Violent Acts; 

• Firearms Laws; 

• Intentional Damage to Vessels; 

• False Distress Calls; 

• False Official Statements; 

• Interstate Flight; 

• Bribery of Public Officials; 

• Neutrality Act; and 

• Property Crimes other than Stolen Vessels. 

F.4. OBSTRUCTION 

OF BOARDING

The following non-felony statutes may apply to individuals who obstruct a Coast 

Guard boarding without engaging in an assault: 

• See 19 USC 70 (master only). Obstructing or hindering an officer going 

aboard to enforce U.S. revenue or navigation laws subjects the master to 

an administrative civil penalty. 

• See 19 USC 1581(d). Failure to stop on command of an officer of 

customs subjects the offender to an administrative civil penalty. 

F.5. CUSTOMS 

LAWS

F.5.a. General 

The IO shall remember that criminal prosecution may only be referred to DOJ by 

District Commander. For this reason, and to ensure legally prudent use of CG 

and CGIS skills/authority, IOs/SIOs should contact CGIS and D(l) when one of 

these crimes is detected. 

• See 46 USC 324. Obstructing or hindering an officer enforcing the 

licensing or documentation laws subjects the offender to an administrative 

civil penalty. 

See 19 USC 1703. Building, purchasing, or outfitting a vessel for the purposes of 

smuggling into the United States or defrauding the revenue of the U.S. makes the 

vessel and its cargo subject to seizure and civil forfeiture. There are no provisions 

under this statute for sanctions against individuals. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 5: VIOLATION ANALYSIS 

B5-11 

F.5.b. Smuggling into Foreign Nations 

F.5.c. Hidden Compartments 

F.6 STOLEN 

VESSELS

F.6.a. Applicable Federal Statutes 

Instances in which the physical taking of the vessel itself constitutes a federal

crime typically involve one or more of the following statutes (each of which must 

be considered carefully to determine its applicability). 

• See 18 USC 661. Taking and carrying away property within the SMTJ. A 

felony has been committed if the stolen property is worth more than $100. 

The theft is not a federal crime unless both the “taking” and the “carrying 

away” elements occur within the SMTJ. 

• See 18 USC 1651. Piracy under the law of nations. Piracy consists of any 

illegal acts of violence or detention or any acts of depredation committed 

seaward of the territorial sea of any nation (i.e., seaward of the 12 NM 

territorial seas of the United States) for private ends by the crew or 

passengers of a private ship or aircraft and directed against another ship or 

aircraft. In contrast, mutiny or other internally generated takeover of a 

vessel by those already aboard is not piracy. By engaging in piracy, a vessel 

essentially becomes stateless. This statute applies to and may be enforced 

against any pirate vessel purporting to fly any flag. The determination of 

whether a vessel is engaged in piracy requires a Commandant’s Statement 

of No Objection (SNO). Piracy under this law is punishable by life 

imprisonment. 

• See 18 USC 2275. Firing at or tampering with a vessel within U.S. 

jurisdiction or endangering the persons onboard such vessels is a felony 

offense. 

F.6.b. Related Crimes 

As noted, in the majority of cases involving possible stolen vessels, the physical 

taking of the vessel is not itself a federal crime. Subsequent acts, however, 

involving the vessel and/or perpetrator may provide a basis for federal 

enforcement action. The federal criminal statutes summarized below (each of

which must be considered carefully to determine when applicable) are all 

potentially available whether or not the physical taking was a federal crime. 

This statute may also apply to vessels attempting to smuggle merchandise into the 

territory of a foreign nation against foreign law (if that nation has laws providing 

for penalty or forfeiture for violation of U.S. laws respecting the customs revenue).

The most common circumstance where vessels are found to be outfitted for 

smuggling involves the discovery of hidden compartments. The presence of

contraband is not legally required for seizure and forfeiture to proceed. However, 

most forfeitures under this statute have involved at least residue of contraband. 

• See 18 USC 2276. Breaking or entering a vessel with the intent to commit 

a felony, if committed within the admiralty and maritime jurisdiction of the 

U.S. but outside the jurisdiction of any state is a felony offense. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 5: VIOLATION ANALYSIS 

B5-12 

• See 18 USC 662. Knowing receipt of stolen property within the SMTJ is a 

federal felony if the stolen property is worth more than $100. 

• See 18 USC 1001. Making false statements or providing false documents 

to federal officials in the performance of their duty is a felony. 

• See 18 USC 2197. Unlawfully using or exhibiting, or attempting to use or 

exhibit any certificate, license, or document issued to U.S. vessels, officers, 

or seamen by an authorized officer is a felony. Altering, forging, 

counterfeiting, or stealing such a certificate is also a felony. 

F.7. VIOLENT 

ACTS

Any injury or fatality case with the following characteristics should be scrutinized 

closely for potential unlawful activity: 

• When one or more of the crewmembers onboard is known to have a 

questionable background or uncertain identity; 

• When the vessel leaves its last port of call or departure point unobserved; 

• When a vessel is outfitted in a way inconsistent with its use; 

• When the vessel is known to have a large sum of money, negotiable 

instruments, or other valuables aboard; and/or 

F.8. VIOLENT 

ACTS WITHIN THE 

SMTJ 

F.8.a. Murder within the SMTJ 

F.8.b. Manslaughter within the SMTJ 

See 18 USC 1112. The statute defines manslaughter as the unlawful killing of a 

human being without malice: voluntary (upon sudden quarrel or heat of passion); 

or involuntary (in the commission of an unlawful act not amounting to a felony or 

without due caution with respect to a lawful act which might produce death). 

Manslaughter, both voluntary and involuntary, is a felony. 

• See 18 USC 2314. The National Stolen Property Act prohibits the 

knowing transportation of stolen goods worth more than $5000 in 

interstate or foreign commerce (i.e, across state lines including maritime 

boundaries, or between the U.S. territorial sea and the high seas). Once 

the stolen goods have been transported in interstate or foreign commerce, 

the federal crime has been committed and returning the property to where 

it was taken does not defeat federal jurisdiction. This is a felony offense. 

• When there are inconsistencies in accounts or with relevant known facts. 

See 18 USC 1111. The statute defines first and second degree murder. First 

degree murder generally includes premeditated or deliberate killing, and those 

committed in the course of other crimes like arson, rape, or robbery. Second 

degree murder includes those killings not within the definition of first degree 

murder. Attempted murder is addressed in 18 USC 1113. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 5: VIOLATION ANALYSIS 

B5-13 

F.8.c. Aggravated Sexual Abuse within the SMTJ. 

F.8.d. Assault within the SMTJ. 

An assault is generically defined as a reasonable apprehension of a harmful or 

offensive touching. Physical contact is not required for an assault to have 

occurred (e.g., an individual points a firearm at another or attempts to stab another 

but misses). As a practical matter, simple nonviolent acts legally constituting

assault may not warrant referral for criminal prosecution. The specific assault 

statutes below have additional elements or limitations before enforcement action 

can be initiated. 

• See 18 USC 111. This statute prohibits forcible assault on federal officers 

(listed in 18 USC 1114) while they are engaged in, or on account of, the 

performance of their official duties. These offenses are felonies. 

• See 18 USC 113. This statute prohibits the unlawful application of, or 

attempted use of, force within the SMTJ. Unlike 18 USC 111, the victim 

of the assault need not be a federal officer, but could be anyone. Lawful 

force requires that there be a legal justification for the use of force and that

the amount of force used was reasonably necessary. Simple assault and 

assault by striking, beating, or wounding are misdemeanors. All other 

assaults, such as with intent to commit any felony, with a dangerous 

weapon, or resulting in serious bodily injury or force, are felonies. Other 

assault statutes exist. For example, various fisheries acts contain specific 

assault provisions. 

F.9. FIREARMS 

LAWS

The serial number of any firearm discovered during an inspection, investigation, or 

boarding should be checked through EPIC. The unlawful possession of a 

federally regulated firearm is a felony offense. All unregistered federally regulated 

firearms, regardless of serviceability, are contraband and are subject to seizure. See 

the following statutes: 

• 18 USC 922(g); 

• 26 USC 5801 et seq., The Gun Control Act; 

• 28 USC 5861(d), Federally Regulated Firearms; and 

See 18 USC 2241. Any person knowingly causing another person to engage in a 

sexual act by using force, threatening or placing the other person in fear of death, 

serious bodily injury or kidnapping or attempts to do so is a violation of this 

felony statute, punishable by life imprisonment. Acts which under various sate law 

would be characterized as rape, forcible sodomy, sexual assault, or any related 

attempts would be prosecuted under this statute. 

• See 18 USC 2231. This statute makes it a felony for anyone to forcibly 

assault, resist, oppose, prevent, impede, intimidate or interfere with any 

person authorized to serve or execute search warrants or to make searches 

and seizures while engaged in those duties. The penalties are greater if a 

deadly weapon is used in the commission of this act. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 5: VIOLATION ANALYSIS 

B5-14 

F.10. FALSE 

DISTRESS CALLS

F.11. FALSE 

OFFICIAL 

STATEMENTS AND 

FALSE DOCUMENTS

F.12. INTERSTATE 

FLIGHT TO AVOID 

PROSECUTION OR 

GIVING TESTIMONY 

F.13. BRIBERY OF 

A PUBLIC OFFICIAL

F.14. NEUTRALITY 

ACT

See 18 USC 960-967. The Neutrality Act prohibits unauthorized acts by private 

U.S. citizens that may affect the foreign relations of the United States. Violation 

of the Act is a felony. The following actions are specifically prohibited: 

• Participating in an expedition against a nation with whom the U.S. is at 

peace; and 

F.15. PROPERTY 

CRIMES OTHER THAN 

STOLEN VESSELS

Several federal statutes apply to property crimes other than stolen vessels: 

• See 18 USC 1363. It is a felony offense if any building, structure, vessel, 

machinery, building materials, aids to navigation, or shipping are willfully and 

maliciously destroyed or injured. 

• See 18 USC 1361. Willful injury or any depredation against any property 

of the United States is a felony if the damage exceeds $100; otherwise it is a 

misdemeanor. 

28 USC 5861, Serial Number Violations for Federally Regulated Firearms. 

See 14 USC 88(c). This crime involves knowingly and willfully communicating a 

false distress call to the Coast Guard or otherwise causing the Coast Guard to 

attempt to saves lives and property when no help is needed. An individual 

violating this statute is subject to a civil penalty and/or felony arrest and is liable 

for all the costs incurred by the Coast Guard. 

See 18 USC 1001. This crime involves knowingly and willfully making false 

statements or presenting false or forged documents to federal officials. The 

statute includes misrepresentations to a boarding officer as to the real owner or 

operator of the vessel and/or using a forged or fraudulent vessel document or 

paper. Violators are subject to felony arrest. 

See 18 USC 1073. This federal offense occurs when an individual travels in 

interstate or foreign commerce (i.e., across state lines, including maritime 

boundaries, or between the U.S. territorial sea and the high seas) with the intent to: 

(1) avoid state prosecution for a state felony; (2) avoid giving testimony in state 

felony proceedings; and/or (3) avoid appearing before a state agency empowered 

to conduct criminal investigations where a subpoena has been issued. This is a 

felony offense. For additional guidance, see the U.S. Coast Guard Maritime Law 

Enforcement Manual, COMDTINST M16247.1 (series). 

See 18 USC 201. It is a felony offense for a public official to accept bribes or for 

anyone to offer anything of value to public officials, either directly or indirectly, to 

influence them in the performance of their official duties. Coast Guard personnel 

accepting a bribe are also subject to punishment under the Uniform Code of 

Military Justice. 

• Arming a vessel against a nation with whom the U.S. is at peace. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 5: VIOLATION ANALYSIS 

B5-15 

F.16. SCUTTLING 

OR INTENTIONAL 

DAMAGE TO VESSELS

F.16.a. Conspiracy to Destroy Vessels 

F.16.b. Destruction by the Owner 

F.16.c. Destruction by Non-owner. 

F.16.d. Destruction or Misuse of Vessel by the 

Person-in-Charge. 

• See 14 USC 84. It is a misdemeanor offense for any person or public body 

to remove, change the location of, obstruct, willfully damage, make fast to, or 

interfere with any aid to navigation established, installed, operated or 

maintained by the Coast Guard. Each day during which such violations 

continue is considered a new offense. 

See 18 USC 2271. It is a felony offense to conspire to destroy or castaway any 

vessel on the high seas or within the U.S. with the intent to injure any insurer or 

lender. 

See 18 USC 2272. It is a felony offense if an owner willfully or corruptly casts 

away or destroys any vessel on the high seas or within the admiralty and maritime 

jurisdiction with the intent to injure an insurer or lender. 

See 18 USC 2273. It is a felony offense if an operator who is not the owner 

willfully or corruptly casts away or destroys any vessel on the high seas or within 

the admiralty and maritime jurisdiction with the intent to injure an insurer or 

lender. 

See 18 USC 2274. It is a felony offense if, within the territorial waters of the 

United States, an owner, master, person-in-charge or in command of any foreign 

or U.S. vessel willfully causes or permits the destruction or injury of a vessel. 
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
USCG Marine Safety Manual 

Volume V: Investigations and Enforcement

PART B: INVESTIGATION 

Chapter Six: 

Safety Recommendations 

And 

Safety Alerts
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
USCG Marine Safety Manual, Volume V: Investigations and Enforcement 

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 6: SAFETY RECOMMENDATIONS AND SAFETY ALERTS

B6-i 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

A. SAFETY RECOMMENDATIONS IN GENERAL .............. 1

A.1. PURPOSE ..........................................................................................................................................................................1

A.2. SOURCES OF SAFETY RECOMMENDATIONS ......................................................................................................................1

A.3. SAFETY ALERTS...............................................................................................................................................................1

A.4. ADMINISTRATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS ...........................................................................................................................1

B. DRAFTING SAFETY RECOMMENDATIONS ............... 1

B.1. BASIS FOR SAFETY RECOMMENDATIONS.........................................................................................................................1

B.1.a. General.....................................................................................................................................................................1

B.1.b. Existence of Latent Unsafe Conditions.....................................................................................................................2

B.1.c. Control over Latent Unsafe Condition .....................................................................................................................2

B.1.d. Lack of Adequate Control Measures........................................................................................................................2

B.2. CONTENT OF SAFETY RECOMMENDATIONS......................................................................................................................2

B.2.a. General Content and Format ...................................................................................................................................2

B.2.b. Who Should Implement the Recommended Action ...................................................................................................3

B.2.c. Recommended Action................................................................................................................................................3

B.2.d. Result of Action ........................................................................................................................................................3

B.3. ADDITION OF SAFETY RECOMMENDATIONS .....................................................................................................................3

C. REVIEWING SAFETY RECOMMENDATIONS............... 4

C.1. GENERAL..........................................................................................................................................................................4

C.2. REVIEW AND ENDORSEMENT WITHIN THE CHAIN OF COMMAND......................................................................................4

C.3. FINAL ACTION..................................................................................................................................................................4

C.3.a. Definition .................................................................................................................................................................4

C.3.b. Who Determines Final Action ..................................................................................................................................5

D. RELEASING SAFETY RECOMMENDATIONS AND FINAL ACTION 5

D.1. AUTHORITY TO RELEASE FINAL ACTION .........................................................................................................................5

D.2. TIMING OF THE RELEASE..................................................................................................................................................5

D.3. MEANS OF RELEASE.........................................................................................................................................................5

E. IMPLEMENTING FINAL ACTION .................... 5

E.1. IMMEDIATE IMPLEMENTATION .........................................................................................................................................5

E.2. FUTURE IMPLEMENTATION...............................................................................................................................................6

E.3. REVISING FINAL ACTION..................................................................................................................................................6

F. SAFETY ALERTS IN GENERAL ..................... 6

F.1. PURPOSE...........................................................................................................................................................................6

F.2. SOURCES OF SAFETY ALERTS ...........................................................................................................................................6

F.3. SAFETY RECOMMENDATIONS ...........................................................................................................................................6

F.4. LESSONS LEARNED ...........................................................................................................................................................7

G. DRAFTING SAFETY ALERTS....................... 7

G.1. BASIS FOR SAFETY ALERT ...............................................................................................................................................7

G.1.a. General ....................................................................................................................................................................7
USCG Marine Safety Manual, Volume V: Investigations and Enforcement 

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 6: SAFETY RECOMMENDATIONS AND SAFETY ALERTS

B6-ii 

G.1.b. Existence of a Latent Unsafe Condition...................................................................................................................7

G.1.c. Extent of the Latent Unsafe Condition .....................................................................................................................7

G.1.d. Urgency....................................................................................................................................................................8

G.2. CONTENT OF SAFETY ALERTS..........................................................................................................................................8

G.2.a. General Content and Format...................................................................................................................................8

G.2.b. What Is Not Included................................................................................................................................................8

G.2.c. Language and Terminology......................................................................................................................................8

G.2.d. Length of Alert .........................................................................................................................................................9

H. REVIEWING SAFETY ALERTS ...................... 9

H.1. GENERAL .........................................................................................................................................................................9

H.2. REVIEW AND ENDORSEMENT WITHIN THE CHAIN OF COMMAND .....................................................................................9

H.3. APPROVAL OF SAFETY ALERTS........................................................................................................................................9

H.3.a. Definition .................................................................................................................................................................9

H.3.b. Who Determines Approval.......................................................................................................................................9

I. RELEASING SAFETY ALERTS ..................... 10

I.1. AUTHORITY TO RELEASE SAFETY ALERTS.......................................................................................................................10

I.2. TIMING OF RELEASE.........................................................................................................................................................10

I.3. MEANS OF RELEASE.........................................................................................................................................................10
USCG Marine Safety Manual, Volume V: Investigations and Enforcement 

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 6: SAFETY RECOMMENDATIONS AND SAFETY ALERTS

B6-1 

A.1. PURPOSE 

A.2. SOURCES OF 

SAFETY 

RECOMMENDATIONS

A.3. SAFETY 

ALERTS

A.4.

ADMINISTRATIVE 

RECOMMENDATIONS

B.1. BASIS FOR 

SAFETY 

RECOMMENDATIONS

B.1.a. General 

Safety recommendations should be based upon and flow logically from the 

findings of fact and conclusions of the incident investigation. To determine 

whether a safety recommendation is appropriate, the Marine Board or 

Investigating Officer (IO) should ask the following questions: 

Has the existence of a specific condition been identified? 

Has that condition been determined to be latently unsafe? 

A. SAFETY RECOMMENDATIONS IN GENERAL

The purpose of Safety Recommendations is to propose corrective actions for 

identified latent unsafe conditions or other unwanted outcomes deemed 

necessary to prevent those conditions from contributing to future casualties.

Safety recommendations originate from several sources. The principle source for 

safety recommendations is incident investigations completed by Coast Guard 

Marine Boards and Investigating Officers (IOs). Investigators from other 

agencies or organizations, in particular the National Transportation Safety Board 

(NTSB), also issue safety recommendations. Other sources include task forces, 

quality action teams, and other temporary groups assigned to study, review and 

analyze a particular aspect of maritime operations. Members of the public may 

submit safety recommendations as well. For the purposes of this chapter, we will 

focus on those safety recommendations issued by Coast Guard Marine Boards 

and IOs upon completion of marine incident investigations. 

In some instances, a latent unsafe condition that is identified and, if left 

unaddressed, poses an immediate threat to safety in a fleet of vessels or particular 

type of operation. When this occurs, the Coast Guard wants to quickly advise the 

public of the condition, explain why it is a threat, and propose actions to mitigate 

that threat. In these circumstances, the issuance of a safety alert instead of a 

safety recommendation may be a more appropriate mechanism to accomplish 

this. Guidance on the use of safety alerts can be found in sections F through I of 

this chapter.

During the course of the incident investigation process, recommendations are 

made regarding the status of the investigation and whether enforcement action 

may appropriate. Examples include a recommendation that the investigation be 

closed or that further investigation into possible violations, misconduct, 

negligence, etc. is warranted. These are not considered safety recommendations. 

They are part of the internal administrative procedures of the Coast Guard, and 

as such, SHALL NOT to be included with safety recommendations. 

B. DRAFTING SAFETY RECOMMENDATIONS

•

•
USCG Marine Safety Manual, Volume V: Investigations and Enforcement 

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 6: SAFETY RECOMMENDATIONS AND SAFETY ALERTS

B6-2 

•

•

Can control be exercised over that condition?

Has it been determined that controls do not currently exist that adequately 

address that condition? 

B.1.b. Existence of Latent Unsafe Conditions 

Safety recommendations must address actual latent unsafe conditions that have 

been found to exist rather than hypothetical conditions. Safety recommendations 

may be made to address any latent unsafe condition identified during an incident 

investigation, including those that did not cause nor contribute to the specific 

incident under investigation. When doing so, the Marine Board or Investigating 

Officer (IO) will need to include an explanation of the risks and probable 

consequences associated with the continued existence of the condition, as it will 

not necessarily be evident from the facts and conclusions of the incident at hand. 

See Chapter B4 of this volume for information on latent unsafe conditions. 

B.1.c. Control over Latent Unsafe Condition 

B.1.d. Lack of Adequate Control Measures 

Safety recommendations should only be made to address latent unsafe conditions 

when one of the following is true: 

There are no current control measures in place. 

The current control measures are found to be inadequate.

B.2. CONTENT OF 

SAFETY 

RECOMMENDATIONS

B.2.a. General Content and Format

Once it has been determined that a safety recommendation is appropriate, the 

Marine Board or Investigating Officer (IO) will want to draft it in a clear, simple 

and easily understood manner. In general, there are three basic questions that a 

Marine Board or IO wants to answer when making a safety recommendation: 

Who should implement the recommended corrective action? 

What is the recommended corrective action? 

What will be the result of implementing that corrective action?

Safety recommendations should only be made to address those latent unsafe 

conditions over which some level of control can be exercised through the 

implementation and use of control measures. Control measures include 

conventions, laws, regulations, policies and procedures. 

Safety recommendations should not be made when the unsafe condition was the 

result of non-compliance with an existing control measure (e.g. a mariner 

intentionally ignored the prohibition against smoking during a transfer operation).

•

•

•

•

•
USCG Marine Safety Manual, Volume V: Investigations and Enforcement 

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 6: SAFETY RECOMMENDATIONS AND SAFETY ALERTS

B6-3 

B.2.b. Who Should Implement the Recommended Action 

Each safety recommendation needs to be addressed to someone who has the 

authority and responsibility over the control measures that would be affected by 

the recommended corrective action. Factors to consider when determining this 

include, but are not limited to the following: 

• The nature of the latent unsafe condition; 

• The extent to which the condition exists (e.g. local, national, 

international); 

• The nature of the recommended action (e.g. procedural, policy-related, 

regulatory, legislative,); and 

• The authority needed to implement the recommended action. 

B.2.c. Recommended Action 

The Marine Board or Investigating Officer (IO) needs to be unambiguous when 

describing the recommended corrective action. The text of the safety 

recommendation should identify the control measure that is the subject of the 

safety recommendation (e.g. procedures, policy, regulations, laws, conventions, 

etc.) and explain what specific and direct action should be taken to address the 

latent unsafe condition. In general, such actions could include: 

• Amending existing law, regulations, policy or procedures; or 

• Development and implementation of new laws, regulations, policies or 

procedures; 

B.2.d. Result of Action 

B.3. ADDITION OF 

SAFETY 

RECOMMENDATIONS

Safety recommendations that are addressed to specific Coast Guard units should 

be addressed to the heads of those units (e.g. Commandant, District Commander, 

Commanding Officer). Safety recommendations addressed to parties outside of 

the Coast Guard should be addressed to the organization, not an individual 

within the organization. 

Marine Boards and IOs should avoid using phrases such as “should consider” or 

“should review” as these indicate uncertainty and a lack of a compelling need for 

corrective action. 

The Marine Board or Investigating Officer (IO) should explain how they believe 

the recommended corrective action will mitigate or eliminate the latent unsafe

condition or unwanted outcome. 

During the review of safety recommendations within the relevant Coast Guard 

chain of command, whoever is conducting the review may identify the need for 

safety recommendations not proposed by the Marine Board or Investigating 

Officer (IO). These recommendations should be included in the activity/case
USCG Marine Safety Manual, Volume V: Investigations and Enforcement 

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 6: SAFETY RECOMMENDATIONS AND SAFETY ALERTS

B6-4 

C.1. GENERAL

C.2. REVIEW AND 

ENDORSEMENT WITHIN 

THE CHAIN OF 

COMMAND

C.3. FINAL 

ACTION

C.3.a. Definition 

The Final Action is the official Coast Guard response to a safety recommendation 

and indicates whether the Coast Guard concurs or does not concur with a safety 

recommendation. In general, there are three possible determinations for the final 

action: 

“Concur – Acceptable Action” – Indicates that the Coast Guard agrees 

that the latent unsafe condition identified in the safety recommendation 

needs to be addressed and will take the recommended corrective action. 

“Concur- Alternate Acceptable Action” – Indicates that the Coast Guard 

agrees that the latent unsafe condition identified in the safety 

recommendation needs to be addressed, but does not agree with the 

recommended corrective action. Instead, an alternate action will be taken 

to address the condition. 

“Do Not Concur – No Action Necessary” – Indicates that the Coast 

Guard does not agree with the determination that additional action needs 

to be taken to address a latent unsafe condition. 

file.

C. REVIEWING SAFETY RECOMMENDATIONS

Each safety recommendation that is issued by a Marine Board or Investigating 

Officer (IO) is subjected to a process of review and endorsement through the 

relevant Coast Guard chain of command in order to evaluate its merits for 

acceptance and implementation. The end goal of this process is the determination 

of the final action for the safety recommendation. 

If there are units within the chain of command between the issuing Investigating 

Officer (IO) and the unit responsible for determining final action, those units shall 

review and endorse each safety recommendation before forwarding them to the 

next unit in the chain of command. The endorsement should indicate whether the 

reviewing unit concurs or does not concur with the safety recommendation and 

provide an explanation for its determination. 

Where it has been determined that the Coast Guard does not concur with a safety 

recommendation, the unit responsible for determining the final action should 

include an explanation for its determination. Where it has been determined that 

the Coast Guard concurs with a safety recommendation, the unit responsible for 

determining the final action should include a description of the actions it will take 

to implement the safety recommendation and an estimate for when those actions 

will be completed. If the actions necessary to implement the safety 

recommendation have already been completed, this should also be indicated in the 

final action.

•

•

•
USCG Marine Safety Manual, Volume V: Investigations and Enforcement 

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 6: SAFETY RECOMMENDATIONS AND SAFETY ALERTS

B6-5 

C.3.b. Who Determines Final Action 

In general, the authority to determine the final action will reside with the head of 

the responsible Coast Guard unit. The following guidelines are provided to help 

establish who will determine the final action: 

For a safety recommendation issued from a unit initiated investigation 

(formal or informal), the head of the Coast Guard unit that holds the 

authority and responsibility for the control measure(s) affected by the 

safety recommendation will determine the final action. 

For a safety recommendation issued from a district formal investigation, 

the District Commander or Commandant will determine the final action as 

appropriate. 

For a safety recommendation issued from a Commandant’s Marine Board 

of Investigation, the Commandant will determine the final action. 

For a safety recommendation issued from any investigation addressed to 

someone outside of the Coast Guard, the Commandant will determine the 

final action. 

D.1. AUTHORITY 

TO RELEASE FINAL 

ACTION

D.2. TIMING OF 

THE RELEASE

D.3. MEANS OF 

RELEASE

E.1. IMMEDIATE 

IMPLEMENTATION

Final agency action for all Commandant-level safety recommendations will be 

coordinated via the Office of Investigations and Analysis, Commandant 

(CG-545).

D. RELEASING SAFETY RECOMMENDATIONS AND FINAL ACTION

The releasing authority and ultimate responsibility for the final action on a safety 

recommendation resides with the head of the Coast Guard unit that determined 

the final action. 

The final action on individual safety recommendations may be released to the 

public upon their completion, regardless of the status of the investigation case 

from which the safety recommendations were issued. 

Final action on a safety recommendation may be shared broadly within the Coast 

Guard and throughout the maritime community and general public. Accordingly, 

the releasing authority may distribute the final action by any appropriate means, 

subject to the restrictions of the Privacy Act. 

E. IMPLEMENTING FINAL ACTION

Where the determination has been made that the Coast Guard does not concur 

with a safety recommendation, the Coast Guard’s actions are complete when that 

determination is documented in the final action. Where the determination has 

been made that the Coast Guard concurs with a safety recommendation, the Coast 

Guard’s actions necessary to implement the safety recommendation may have

•

•

•

•
USCG Marine Safety Manual, Volume V: Investigations and Enforcement 

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 6: SAFETY RECOMMENDATIONS AND SAFETY ALERTS

B6-6 

E.2. FUTURE 

IMPLEMENTATION

In many cases where the determination has been made that the Coast Guard 

concurs with a safety recommendation, the Coast Guard’s actions to implement 

the safety recommendation will not be immediate, but extend over a period of 

time. In such instances, the authority responsible for the final action will also be 

responsible for tracking and documenting the status and eventual completion of 

the Coast Guard’s implementing actions. Specific information to be documented 

includes: 

• Estimated start date/completion date;

• Estimated effort to complete (resources); 

• Actual start date; 

• Status of actions, including periodic documentation of actions completed 

up to a particular point in time, problems or delays encountered, and 

changes to original plans for implementation; and 

• Actual completion date.

E.3. REVISING 

FINAL ACTION

F.1. PURPOSE

F.2. SOURCES OF 

SAFETY ALERTS

F.3. SAFETY 

RECOMMENDATIONS

Safety recommendations are intended to propose corrective actions for identified 

latent unsafe conditions deemed necessary to prevent those conditions from 

contributing to future incidents. These corrective actions may include changes to 

policy, law, or regulation. Although similar, safety alerts and safety 

recommendations differ in the following ways: 

• Safety alerts are only based upon conditions identified in the findings of 

already been taken or are completed immediately. In such instances, those actions 

should be documented in the final action with an indication of when they were 

completed. 

In some instances, events occur which indicate that a previous determination of 

final action for a safety recommendation may be incorrect or incomplete. In such 

cases, the responsible Coast Guard authority has the discretion to review and 

amend the final agency action. If the final action is amended, the new final action 

should include an explanation of why the original was amended. 

F. SAFETY ALERTS IN GENERAL

The purpose of safety alerts is to quickly advise the public of conditions that, if 

left unaddressed, pose urgent threats to safety in fleets of vessels or particular 

types of operations and propose voluntary actions for elimination or mitigation of 

those threats. 

Safety alerts originate primarily from marine casualty investigations completed by 

Coast Guard Marine Boards and Investigating Officers (IOs). However, the 

issuance of a safety alert will be considered based upon its merits regardless of its 

source. 
USCG Marine Safety Manual, Volume V: Investigations and Enforcement 

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 6: SAFETY RECOMMENDATIONS AND SAFETY ALERTS

B6-7 

fact. Safety recommendations are based upon and flow logically from the 

findings of fact and conclusions drawn through causal analysis. 

• Safety alerts are issued to the public in general or may be focused on a 

general segment of the maritime community. Safety recommendations 

are issued to a specific person, unit or organization. 

• Safety alerts recommend voluntary actions. Safety recommendations may 

result in the implementation of mandatory requirements and procedures. 

• Safety alerts primarily involve immediate actions intended as short-term 

solutions. Safety recommendations may involve actions being taken over 

an extended period of time to provide a long-term solution. 

F.4. LESSONS 

LEARNED

G.1. BASIS FOR 

SAFETY ALERT

G.1.a. General 

Safety alerts should be based upon the findings of fact from the incident 

investigation. To determine whether a safety alert is appropriate, the Marine 

Board or Investigating Officer (IO) should ask the following questions: 

• Has the existence of a specific latent unsafe condition been identified? 

• What is the extent of the condition? Is it common in the overall maritime 

community, within a particular class or fleet, or is it rarely found on 

vessels, facilities or in operations? 

G.1.b. Existence of a Latent Unsafe Condition 

G.1.c. Extent of the Latent Unsafe Condition 

Guidance on the use of safety recommendations can be found in Sections A 

through E of this Chapter. 

Lessons learned are another means of advising the public of unsafe conditions, as 

well as recommending actions that can be taken to mitigate or eliminate them. 

However, unlike safety alerts, lessons learned are not urgent and are typically 

published upon completion of an incident investigation as a means of 

emphasizing the need to prevent unsafe conditions from arising. Except for the 

urgency of the process, the drafting, approval and release of lessons learned is the 

same as for safety alerts. 

G. DRAFTING SAFETY ALERTS

• Is there an urgent need to recommend taking actions to mitigate the 

impact of the identified latent unsafe condition? 

Safety alerts must address actual latent unsafe conditions that have been found to 

exist rather than hypothetical conditions. Safety alerts may be made to address 

any latent unsafe condition identified during an incident investigation. 

When determining whether a safety alert is appropriate, the Marine Board or the 
USCG Marine Safety Manual, Volume V: Investigations and Enforcement 

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 6: SAFETY RECOMMENDATIONS AND SAFETY ALERTS

B6-8 

G.1.d. Urgency 

G.2. CONTENT OF 

SAFETY ALERTS

G.2.a. General Content and Format 

A safety alert should convey the following information: 

• A clear and precise description of the latent unsafe condition; 

• A short explanation of why the condition is unsafe (i.e. what are the 

consequences if no action is taken); and 

• Recommended action(s) to be taken to eliminate or mitigate the 

condition. 

G.2.b. What Is Not Included 

Safety alerts are intended to address only latent unsafe conditions identified in the 

findings of fact and recommended actions to mitigate or eliminate the conditions. 

They are not to include any reference to conclusions drawn from causal or 

violation analysis regarding the following: 

• Whether an identified condition was the cause or a contributing factor to 

the incident under investigation, and if so, the extent of its role in the 

incident; or 

• Whether an identified condition, or any actions leading to that condition, 

are or may be considered a violation of law or regulation. 

G.2.c. Language and Terminology 

Investigating Officer (IO) should attempt to ascertain the extent to which the 

identified condition exists outside of the specific incident that is being 

investigated. If it is determined to be a common condition that extends over a 

broad range of vessels, facilities, parties or operations, whether of a certain type 

or within some geographical boundary, then a safety alert may be appropriate. 

Safety alerts should generally be limited to addressing those latent unsafe 

conditions that, if no immediate action is taken, will result in additional incidents 

in the near future. In most other situations, where the condition is either rare or 

is less likely to contribute to an incident, then a safety recommendation may be

more appropriate. 

• If appropriate, a disclaimer indicating that the Coast Guard has not yet 

concluded whether this or any other condition played a part in the cause 

or severity of the incident under investigation. 

While the Investigating Officer (IO) must ensure that the language used when 

drafting a safety alert is sufficiently precise, he/she must also take into 

consideration the audience for which the alert is intended, as the various sectors 

of the maritime community have different levels of technical expertise and, in 

many cases, their own terminology. Safety alerts intended for a specific sector 
USCG Marine Safety Manual, Volume V: Investigations and Enforcement 

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 6: SAFETY RECOMMENDATIONS AND SAFETY ALERTS

B6-9 

G.2.d. Length of Alert 

H.1. GENERAL

H.2. REVIEW AND 

ENDORSEMENT WITHIN 

THE CHAIN OF 

COMMAND

H.3. APPROVAL OF 

SAFETY ALERTS

H.3.a. Definition 

H.3.b. Who Determines Approval 

In general, the authority to approve a safety alert will reside with the head of the 

responsible Coast Guard unit. The following guidelines are provided to help 

establish who will determine the approval of a safety alert: 

• For a safety alert drafted from a unit initiated investigation (formal or 

informal), the head of the Coast Guard unit that holds the authority and 

responsibility for the area/community affected by a safety alert will 

determine its approval. 

• For a safety alert drafted from a district formal investigation, the District 

Commander or Commandant will determine its approval. 

need to use language and terminology that is appropriate for that particular 

sector. For example, a safety alert intended for the recreational boating 

community would be phrased differently than one of a similar nature intended for 

the commercial fishing industry. 

Safety alerts should be as short as possible to allow for rapid and widest 

dissemination, while still adequately explaining the situation. 

H. REVIEWING SAFETY ALERTS

Each safety alert that is drafted by a Marine Board or Investigating Officer (IO) is 

subject to a process of review and endorsement through the relevant Coast

Guard chain of command in order to evaluate its merits. The end goal of this 

process is the determination of its approval for release. 

If there are units within the chain of command between the drafting Marine 

Board or Investigating Officer (IO) and the unit responsible for the approval and 

release of a safety alert, those units shall review and endorse the safety alert 

before forwarding it to the next unit in the chain of command. The endorsement 

should indicate whether the reviewing unit concurs or does not concur with the 

safety alert and provide an explanation for its determination. By their nature, 

safety alerts are very time sensitive. Accordingly, reviewers should give safety 

alerts a high priority for review through the chain of command for approval and 

release. 

The approval of a drafted safety alert is similar to the final action for a safety 

recommendation. It represents the official Coast Guard response to a draft safety 

alert and indicates whether the Coast Guard concurs or does not concur that the 

issuance of a safety alert is necessary and/or appropriate. 
USCG Marine Safety Manual, Volume V: Investigations and Enforcement 

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 6: SAFETY RECOMMENDATIONS AND SAFETY ALERTS

B6-10 

• For a safety alert drafted from a Commandant's Marine Board of 

Investigation, the Commandant will determine its approval. 

I.1. AUTHORITY TO 

RELEASE SAFETY 

ALERTS

I.2. TIMING OF 

RELEASE

I.3. MEANS OF 

RELEASE

Safety alerts may be released through one or more appropriate means at the 

discretion of the releasing authority. In general, the means of release should be 

such that it is focused on the target audience of the safety alert. Some typical

means of release include:

• Press Release - perhaps the most effective in "getting the word out" it is 

also one of the least capable at targeting a specific sector of the maritime 

community. 

• E-mail Distribution List - some units have developed, or are developing, 

e-mail distribution lists of members of the various sectors of the maritime 

community that operate within their AOR (e.g. all local T-boat operators). 

This method of distribution allows for improved targeting of a particular 

group; however, its usefulness is dependent on the e-mail capabilities of 

the intended audience. 

• Internet Publication - many Coast Guard units now have web sites that, in 

addition to providing unit specific information (e.g. address, phone 

numbers, missions, etc.), are also used to post announcements and other 

information intended for public release. If units intend to publish safety 

alerts on their web site, they should advertise the web address and 

encourage the public to check it regularly. This method allows for a wide 

distribution with little effort, but is one of the least capable at targeting a 

specific sector of the maritime community. 

Approval of all Commandant-level safety alerts will be coordinated via the Office 

of Investigations and Analysis, Commandant (CG-545). 

I. RELEASING SAFETY ALERTS

The releasing authority for a safety alert resides with the head of the Coast Guard 

unit that approved it. 

The release of a safety alert should occur as soon after its approval as possible. 

As with all matters dealing with making information regarding an incident 

available to the public, the releasing authority must be sensitive to the impact a 

safety alert may have on grieving families and on the professional image of the 

Coast Guard.

• Periodicals - periodicals such as magazines and newsletters, whether 

published by the Coast Guard or a commercial organization, can be a very 

effective means of targeting a specific audience. In many cases though, 

the delay in writing, proofing and publishing the periodical make this 
USCG Marine Safety Manual, Volume V: Investigations and Enforcement 

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 6: SAFETY RECOMMENDATIONS AND SAFETY ALERTS

B6-11 

means of release ill suited to the urgent nature of a safety alert. However, 

periodicals may be used as an effective means of following up on the 

initial release and emphasizing the information provided in the safety 

alert. 
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 
USCG Marine Safety Manual 

Volume V: Investigations and Enforcement

PART B: INVESTIGATION

Chapter Seven: 

Marine Casualty 

Investigation
 

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 7: MARINE CASUALTY INVESTIGATION

B7-i 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

A. MARINE CASUALTIES AND INCIDENTS ................ 1

A.1. WHAT IS A MARINE CASUALTY?........................................................................................................................................1

A.2. WHICH REPORTABLE MARINE CASUALTIES DO WE INVESTIGATE?.................................................................................1

A.2.a. General.....................................................................................................................................................................1

A.2.b. Criteria for the Investigation of Marine Casualties and Determining the Level of Investigative Effort ..................1

A.3. HAZARDOUS CONDITIONS................................................................................................................................................5

A.4. POST CASUALTY DRUG AND ALCOHOL TESTING .............................................................................................................5

A.5. WHO SHOULD BE TESTED AND WHEN TESTING SHOULD BE INITIATED..........................................................................5

A.6. RESPONSIBILITY FOR CONDUCTING THE TESTS AND RESULTS .........................................................................................6

A.7. KINDS OF TESTS TO BE CONDUCTED ................................................................................................................................6

A.8. DESIGNATION AS A PARTY-IN-INTEREST..........................................................................................................................6

B. MARINE CASUALTY TERMINOLOGY AND ANALYSIS 

REQUIREMENTS................................... 7

B.1. POLICY WITH REGARD TO TERMINOLOGY IN MARINE CASUALTY INVESTIGATIONS.......................................................7

B.2. POLICY WITH REGARD TO THE REQUIRED ANALYSIS FOR MARINE CASUALTIES............................................................7

B.2.a. General.....................................................................................................................................................................7

B.2.b. Preliminary Level of Investigation ...........................................................................................................................7

B.2.c. Data Collection Level of Investigation .....................................................................................................................7

B.2.d. Informal Level of Investigation.................................................................................................................................7

B.2.e. Formal Level of Investigation...................................................................................................................................8

C. MARINE CASUALTIES AND INCIDENTS REPORTED TO THE 

INTERNATIONAL MARITIME ORGANIZATION (IMO) .......... 8

C.1. INFORMATION REQUIRED FOR INCIDENTS REPORTED TO THE IMO..................................................................................8

D. VESSEL FIRES AND EXPLOSIONS.................. 11

D.1. BASIC FIRE SCIENCE ......................................................................................................................................................11

D.1.a. Elements of Combustion.........................................................................................................................................11

D.1.b. The Oxidation Reaction .........................................................................................................................................12

D.1.c. Flaming Fires.........................................................................................................................................................12

D.1.d. Glowing Fires ........................................................................................................................................................12

D.1.e. Explosions..............................................................................................................................................................12

D.1.f. BLEVE ....................................................................................................................................................................12

D.2. SEQUENCE OF A COMPARTMENT FIRE............................................................................................................................13

D.2.a. Introduction............................................................................................................................................................13

D.2.b. Ignition...................................................................................................................................................................13

D.2.c. Incipient Stage........................................................................................................................................................13

D.2.d. Free Burning Stage ................................................................................................................................................13

D.2.e. Smoldering Stage ...................................................................................................................................................13

D.3. TRACING THE COURSE OF THE FIRE ...............................................................................................................................14

D.3.a. Introduction............................................................................................................................................................14

D.3.b. Fires burn upward .................................................................................................................................................14

D.3.c. Insufficient fuel causes a fire to burn out ...............................................................................................................14

D.3.d. Fires can be diverted by ventilation or radiant ignition ........................................................................................14

D.3.e. Vertical spread is enhanced by “chimneys” ..........................................................................................................14
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 7: MARINE CASUALTY INVESTIGATION

B7-ii 

D.3.f. Downward spread, while less common, can occur.................................................................................................14

D.3.g. Fires generally spread like a hot gas.....................................................................................................................14

D.3.h. Fire suppression efforts affect flame spread..........................................................................................................15

D.3.i. Liquid fuels produce different burn patterns ..........................................................................................................15

D.4. INSPECTING THE FIRE SCENE..........................................................................................................................................15

D.4.a. Sequence of the Inspection.....................................................................................................................................15

D.4.b. Heat Horizon..........................................................................................................................................................15

D.4.c. Smoke Horizon .......................................................................................................................................................15

D.4.d. Glass ......................................................................................................................................................................15

D.5. ELECTRICAL FIRES.........................................................................................................................................................16

D.6. IMO SUGGESTED FIRE AND EXPLOSION QUESTIONS.....................................................................................................16

E. VESSEL NAVIGATION INCIDENTS.................. 17

E.1. NAVIGATION CASUALTIES ..............................................................................................................................................17

E.1.a. General...................................................................................................................................................................17

E.1.b. Definition of a Collision .........................................................................................................................................17

E.1.c. Definition of an Allision..........................................................................................................................................17

E.1.d. Definition of a Grounding ......................................................................................................................................17

E.2. DETECTION OF NAVIGATION TYPE CASUALTIES ............................................................................................................17

E.3. TIMELY ARRIVAL TO AN INCIDENT SITE .........................................................................................................................17

E4. SECURING THE INCIDENT SCENE ......................................................................................................................................17

E.4.a. Securing the Wheelhouse........................................................................................................................................17

E.4.b. Secure Critical Documentary Evidence..................................................................................................................18

E.4.c. Collection of Physical Evidence – A Critical Eye...................................................................................................19

E.5. COLLECTION OF OCCURRENCE DATA.............................................................................................................................19

E.5.a. General Casualty Data –All Cases.........................................................................................................................19

E.5.b. Vessel Related Data – All Cases.............................................................................................................................20

E.5.c. Documentary Evidence – All Cases........................................................................................................................21

E.5.d. Data Regarding Collisions/Allisions/Groundings..................................................................................................22

E.5.e. Vessel Navigation/Control information to collect ..................................................................................................23

E.5.f. Information to Collect from Each Involved Party ...................................................................................................25

E.5.g. Involved Party Checklist.........................................................................................................................................25

E.5.h. Change Analysis - What was different this time? ..................................................................................................26

E.6. DIAGRAMS......................................................................................................................................................................26

E.7. DIRECTION OF THE INVESTIGATION ................................................................................................................................27

E.8. IMO SUGGESTED QUESTIONS ABOUT COLLISIONS - GENERAL.......................................................................................27

E.9. IMO SUGGESTED QUESTIONS FOR EACH SHIP................................................................................................................27

E.10. IMO SUGGESTED QUESTIONS ABOUT GROUNDINGS.....................................................................................................28

E.11. IMO SUGGESTED QUESTIONS ABOUT FOUNDERING .....................................................................................................28

F. STABILITY RELATED INCIDENTS.................. 29

F.1. STABILITY.......................................................................................................................................................................29

F.1.a. General...................................................................................................................................................................29

F.1.b. Stability Incidents...................................................................................................................................................30

F.1.c. Loading Issues / Weight Shifts................................................................................................................................30

F.1.d. Flooding .................................................................................................................................................................30

F.2. USEFUL INFORMATION FOR THE IO.................................................................................................................................31

F.2.a. Ship’s Hull Markings..............................................................................................................................................31

F.2.b. Plimsoll Marks (Load lines)..................................................................................................................................31

F.2.c. Flood Rates.............................................................................................................................................................32

F.2.d. Table of Flood Rates ..............................................................................................................................................33
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 7: MARINE CASUALTY INVESTIGATION

B7-iii 

G. OCCUPATIONAL INJURY OR DEATH ................. 33

G.1. GENERAL .......................................................................................................................................................................33

G.2. EXISTING MEDICAL CONDITIONS...................................................................................................................................33

G.3. SUICIDE, HOMICIDE, ASSAULT AND BATTERY ...............................................................................................................33

G.4. DIVING INCIDENT INVESTIGATIONS ...............................................................................................................................33

G.4.a. Introduction............................................................................................................................................................33

G.4.b. Commercial Diving................................................................................................................................................34

G.4.c. Non-Commercial Diving ........................................................................................................................................34

G.4.d. Diving Mode...........................................................................................................................................................34

G.4.e. Fact-Finding - General ..........................................................................................................................................34

G.4.e.1. Resources ............................................................................................................................................................34

G.4.e.2. Divers Alert Network...........................................................................................................................................35

G.4.e.3. Some Suggested Questions..................................................................................................................................35

G.4.e.4. SCUBA (see 46 CFR 197.430) ............................................................................................................................37

G.4.e.5. Surface supplied air (see 46 CFR 197.432) ........................................................................................................37

G.4.e.6. Surface supplied mixed gas (see 46 CFR 197.434).............................................................................................37

G.4.3.7. Liveboat (see 46 CFR 197.436) ..........................................................................................................................37

H. PERSONS MISSING AND PRESUMED DEAD ............. 38

H.1 GENERAL .........................................................................................................................................................................38

H.2 LETTER OF PRESUMED DEATH ........................................................................................................................................38
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 7: MARINE CASUALTY INVESTIGATION

B7-1 

A.1. WHAT IS A 

MARINE CASUALTY? 

See 46 CFR 

4.03-1

A marine casualty or accident is any incident involving any vessel (except a public 

vessel) that occurs on the navigable waters of the United States and involving any 

vessel U.S. vessel (except a public vessel), that results in: 

• Damage to or by the vessel or gear; or 

• Injury or loss of life to any person. 

Some typical marine casualties are: 

• Collisions 

• Allisions 

• Groundings 

• Heavy weather damage 

• Fires 

• Explosions 

• Failure of gear and equipment 

• Any damage affecting or impairing seaworthiness of a vessel 

• Any injury 

• Any loss of life, and 

A.2. WHICH 

REPORTABLE MARINE 

CASUALTIES DO WE 

INVESTIGATE? 

See 46 CFR 4.05-1 

and 

46 CFR 4.01-3

A.2.a. General 

All incidents reported to the Coast Guard, regardless of the source, will be 

investigated in accordance with 46 USC 6301 and 46 CFR 4.07, however, the 

OCMI/COTP must determine on a case-by-case basis what investigative actions are 

appropriate for a specific case based on the likely value to marine safety, available 

resources, and risks in a given port. The criteria for the investigation of marine 

casualties and determining level of effort are detailed below. 

A.2.b. Criteria for the Investigation of Marine 

Casualties and Determining the Level of Investigative 

Effort 

Preliminary Investigations A preliminary investigation shall be conducted for any 

report or evidence of a reportable marine casualty as defined in 46 CFR 4.05-1 

involving a U.S. or foreign flag commercial vessel. The following criteria applies: 

• When a preliminary investigation reveals that a reportable marine casualty as

defined in 46 CFR 4.05-1 has in fact occurred, the level of investigative effort 

shall be raised to a data collection activity, informal investigation, or formal 

investigation. 

• When a preliminary investigation reveals that a marine casualty meets the MISLE 

A. MARINE CASUALTIES AND INCIDENTS

• Any injury or loss of life while diving from a vessel using underwater 

breathing apparatus. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 7: MARINE CASUALTY INVESTIGATION

B7-2 

Data Entry Exemption below, is not reportable under 46 CFR 4.05-1, or it cannot 

be verified that a marine casualty has occurred, no additional investigative effort is 

required and the results of the preliminary investigation shall be documented in 

MISLE in accordance with the MISLE Process Guides. 

• Investigations closed at the preliminary level should be documented in the 

MISLE notification only; however if an Incident Investigation Activity is 

generated in MISLE there is no requirement for findings of fact (timeline) entries. 

Data Collection Activities A data collection activity shall be conducted for all 

reportable marine casualties as defined in 46 CFR 4.05-1 not assigned to Informal 

Investigation or Formal Investigation. MISLE data entry requirements shall be in 

accordance with the Investigations and Enforcement Process Guide. 

• MISLE Incident Investigation Data Entry. Normally, the reported casualty 

information should be entered into MISLE with only minimum effort expended 

to verify its accuracy and completeness in accordance with the Investigations and 

Enforcement Process Guide. The intent of this policy is to reduce the unit 

workload resulting from investigation of minor marine casualties to an absolute 

minimum while retaining basic event information for trend and statistical analysis. 

• MISLE Incident Investigation Data Entry Exceptions. No MISLE data 

entry beyond the MISLE notification information (see Chapter B2) is necessary 

or desired for marine casualties meeting the below criteria. For incidents meeting 

this criteria, the CG-2692 and any other material received should be documented 

in the notification after minimal review to verify that the incident meets one of 

the criteria. The unit shall electronically attach the CG-2692 and other 

‘notification’ material to the MISLE notification. 

1. Groundings involving "bump and go" touching of the bottom on 

Western Rivers (as defined in 33 USC 2003) by uninspected towing 

vessels and uninspected barges in the navigation channel with no damage, 

no pollution, no personnel injuries, no breaking apart of the tow, and no 

assistance required to resume voyage. 

2. Casualties involving only minor injury. A minor injury is any injury that 

does not result in broken bones (other than fingers, toes, or nose), loss of 

limbs, severe hemorrhaging, severe muscle, nerve, tendon, or internal 

organ damage, or in hospitalization for more than 48 hours within 5 days 

of the injury. 

3. Casualties involving injuries when the injuries result from a pre-existing 

medical condition and not from a marine operation. (i.e. a mariner with 

diabetes suffers a spell of blurry vision, and during the spell trips because 

he did not see a deck fitting and breaks a leg.) If the mariner holds license 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 7: MARINE CASUALTY INVESTIGATION

B7-3 

or merchant mariner’s document the incident should be investigated to 

determine if suspension and revocation proceedings should be pursued by 

reason of medical incompetence. 

4. Casualties (other than collisions and allisions) reported only because of 

property damage in excess of $25,000 where the property damage does 

not exceed $100,000. 

5. Casualties involving U.S. state-numbered commercial vessels exempt from 

reporting to the Coast Guard under 46 CFR 4.01-3(a), unless the incident 

meets the criteria to conduct a formal or informal investigation. 

Informal Investigations An informal investigation should be conducted for any 

casualty involving a U.S. or foreign flag commercial vessel and meeting any of the 

below criteria. MISLE data entry requirements shall be in accordance with the 

MISLE Process Guides. 

• Death: One death. Death cases may be downgraded to the Data Collection Activity

level of investigation after credible evidence (such as a death certificate) indicates 

death from natural causes (including a pre-existing medical condition) or suicide. 

• Injury: One injury which results in fractured bones (other than fingers, toes, or 

nose), loss of limbs, severe hemorrhaging, severe muscle, nerve, tendon, or 

internal organ damage, or in hospitalization for more than 48 hours within 5 days 

of the injury. 

• Vessel loss: Loss of an uninspected vessel of less than 500 GT, or loss of a barge 

of more than 100 GT on inland waters (as defined in 33 USC 2003). 

• Property damage: An event involving a vessel and resulting in property damage 

exceeding $100,000 but less than $1,000,000. The damage value comprises the 

cost of labor and material to restore the property (vessels, shoreline facilities, 

pipelines, OCS facilities, etc.) to its original condition before the occurrence, but 

does not include damage to natural resources, or the cost of salvage, cleaning, gasfreeing, dry-docking, or demurrage. Damage values should be the best estimates 

available immediately following the accident. 

• Collision: Any collision or allision resulting in property damage exceeding 

$25,000. 

• Loss of propulsion or steering: Any loss of propulsion or steering, even if 

momentary, affecting an inspected U.S. vessel anywhere, or affecting a foreign 

flag vessel or an uninspected U.S. vessel over 100 GT on U.S. navigable waters. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 7: MARINE CASUALTY INVESTIGATION

B7-4 

• Flooding or fire: Flooding or fire that adversely affect a vessel’s fitness for service 

on an inspected U.S. vessel anywhere, or on a foreign flag vessel or an 

uninspected U.S. vessel over 100 GT on U.S. navigable waters. 

• Equipment failure: Failure of Coast Guard-approved primary lifesaving 

equipment or Coast Guard-approved firefighting equipment. 

• Discharge: Medium discharge of oil or medium release of a hazardous substance 

(as defined in 40 CFR 300.5), or of hazardous cargoes regulated under 

46 CFR Subchapter O, in which a vessel is the source or the cause of the 

discharge or release. 

• Commercial Diving Casualty. Death or injury of persons diving from a vessel for 

commercial purposes. 

• Recreational Diving Casualty: Death or injury of persons diving from a vessel in 

federal waters for recreational purposes.

Formal Investigation A formal investigation should be conducted for any casualty 

involving a U.S. or foreign flag commercial vessel and meeting any of the below 

criteria. MISLE data entry requirements shall be in accordance with the MISLE 

Process Guides. 

• Death: 2 or more deaths.

• Injury: 2 or more seriously disabling injuries or 6 or more injuries which result in 

fractured bones (other than fingers, toes, or nose), loss of limbs, severe 

hemorrhaging, severe muscle, nerve, tendon, or internal organ damage, or in 

hospitalization for more than 48 hours within 5 days of the injury. 

• Vessel loss: Loss of an inspected vessel, or loss of an uninspected vessel of 500 

GT or more. 

• Property damage: An event involving a vessel and resulting in property damage 

exceeding $1,000,000. The damage value comprises the cost of labor and material 

to restore the property (vessels, shoreline facilities, pipelines, OCS facilities, etc.) 

to its original condition before the occurrence, but does not include damage to 

natural resources, or the cost of salvage, cleaning, gas-freeing, dry-docking, or 

demurrage. Damage values should be the best estimates available immediately 

following the accident. 

• Discharge: Major discharge of oil or major release of a hazardous substance (as 

defined in 40 CFR 300.5), or of hazardous cargoes regulated under 

46 CFR Subchapter O, in which a vessel is the source or the cause of the 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 7: MARINE CASUALTY INVESTIGATION

B7-5 

discharge or release. 

Foreign Flag Exception: A formal investigation is not required for a casualty 

involving only a foreign flag vessel (i.e., no U.S. vessel involved, no damage to U.S. 

property, and no injury of U.S. citizens). 

A.3. HAZARDOUS 

CONDITIONS

See 33 CFR 

160.215 

The owner, agent, master, operator, or person in charge must report a hazardous 

condition to the COTP if such a condition exists under 33 CFR 160.215. A 

hazardous condition is any condition on the navigable waters of the United States 

that may adversely affect: 

• the safety of any vessel, bridge, structure, or shore area; or 

• the environmental quality of any port, harbor or navigable waterway of the 

United States. 

Typical hazardous conditions include (but aren’t limited to): 

• Collisions; 

• Allisions; 

• Fires; 

• Explosions; 

• Groundings; 

• Leaking; 

• Damage; 

• Injury or illness of a person onboard; and 

• Manning shortages. 

A.4. POST 

CASUALTY DRUG AND 

ALCOHOL TESTING 

See 46 CFR 4.05-

12 

Following every marine casualty reportable to the Coast Guard under 46 CFR 4.05-

10, the marine employer must determine whether there is any evidence of alcohol or 

drug use by the individuals directly involved. Such evidence may include chemical 

tests for drugs and alcohol. Any evidence must be preserved and reported to the 

Coast Guard. Again, this general responsibility applies to all reportable marine 

casualties, not only to serious marine incidents. 

A.5. WHO SHOULD 

BE TESTED AND 

WHEN TESTING 

SHOULD BE 

INITIATED

See 46 CFR 4.06-1

Barge Exception: A formal investigation is not required for the loss of a barge on 

inland waters (as defined in 33 USC 2003). 

Reporting a hazardous condition to the COTP does not alleviate the person of the 

responsibility to report a marine casualty, or vice-versa. 

At the time of a marine casualty, the marine employer must make a good faith 

determination whether the incident is or will likely become a serious marine incident. 

If it is or likely will be, the marine employer must decide whom aboard the vessel was 

directly involved in the incident. A law enforcement officer can also decide who was 

directly involved, and “add” people to the marine employer’s list. Those directly 

involved people, excluding passengers for hire, must be tested for drugs and alcohol. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 7: MARINE CASUALTY INVESTIGATION

B7-6 

A.6.

RESPONSIBILITY FOR 

CONDUCTING THE 

TESTS AND RESULTS

See 46 CFR 4.06-5 

46 CFR 4.06-10, 

46 CFR 4.06-60, 

and 

46 CFR 4.05-10

The marine employer is responsible for assuring that drug and alcohol testing is 

conducted, but no individual can legally be forced to give a sample for chemical 

testing. In such refusal cases, the individual’s refusal must be documented, and that 

person may be liable for a civil penalty or be subject to Coast Guard action against 

their MMC (if they hold one). Evidence of drug or alcohol use, including test results, 

must be reported and made available to the Coast Guard as soon as possible after 

receipt. 

A.7. KINDS OF 

TESTS TO BE 

CONDUCTED

See 46 CFR 4.06-

20 

46 CFR 4.06-30, 

46 CFR 4.06-40, 

46 CFR 4.06-50, 

46 CFR part 16. 

Chemical tests of an individual’s breath for the presence of alcohol may be conducted 

by an individual trained to do so, and should be supervised by qualified collection 

personnel, the marine employer, his or her representative, or a law enforcement 

officer. No specific chemical test for alcohol is required. 

In most instances, the marine employer themselves do not collect or analyze samples 

for the presence of drugs. In these cases, the sample, collection, custody, analysis, 

and review must be completed according to the regulations contained in 46 CFR Part 

16. 

A.8. DESIGNATION 

AS A PARTY-ININTEREST

See 46 CFR 4.03-

10 

Any person who has a direct interest in the outcome of a marine casualty 

investigation can be involved in that investigation. Although IOs consider requests to 

be designated a Party-in-Interest on a case-by-case basis. Parties-in-interest are 

statutorily defined in 46 USC 6303. 

Parties-in-interest can be represented by attorneys or other persons, produce evidence 

for the Coast Guard to consider, call witnesses to give testimony for the Coast Guard, 

and have the right to examine evidence and testimony given to the Coast Guard. 

Parties-in-interest exercise their rights by requesting them through the IO, who 

(because they retain control of the investigation) will determine whether the evidence 

and witnesses are necessary and relevant to the investigation’s purposes. 

In a formal investigation, parties-in-interest generally are designated in writing and 

exercise their rights through the IO during formal public hearings. In an informal 

investigation, parties-in-interest are generally not designated in writing, but are noted 

in the ROI, and arrangements regarding the need or interest to be present during 

interviews and the review of evidence is worked out on a case-by-case basis. See 

Chapter A5 for more information. 

People ordered to be tested should not leave their duties in the aftermath of an 

incident when their performance is necessary to save lives or property, or to protect 

the environment. Wherever possible, the marine employer must assure alcohol 

testing is completed within 2 hours of a serious marine incident. Drug testing should 

be completed as soon as practicable after a serious marine incident. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 7: MARINE CASUALTY INVESTIGATION

B7-7 

B.1. POLICY WITH 

REGARD TO 

TERMINOLOGY IN 

MARINE CASUALTY 

INVESTIGATIONS

B.2. POLICY WITH 

REGARD TO THE 

REQUIRED ANALYSIS 

FOR MARINE 

CASUALTIES

B.2.a. General 

This section details policy with regard to the minimum parts of the analysis in

Chapter B4 to be used for marine casualty investigations for all levels of investigative 

effort. 

B.2.b. Preliminary Level of Investigation 

B.2.c. Data Collection Level of Investigation 

Marine casualty investigations that reach the data collection level of investigation 

require the generating of a timeline with only enough information to meet the 

minimum data entry requirements for MISLE as detailed in the MISLE Process 

Guides. 

B.2.d. Informal Level of Investigation 

Marine casualty investigations that reach the informal level of investigation require 

the following: 

• Generating a Timeline: All steps necessary to complete the requirements of 

causal analysis below. 

• Causal Analysis: Shall determine the initiating event and all subsequent events. 

Shall analyze all applicable defense failures or missing defenses between the 

events. Should determine active failures in production and preconditions 

leading to them and the missing or failed defenses between them. 

• Human Error Analysis: Shall determine all unsafe acts and decisions in 

production and all failed defenses. 

• Conclusions: Shall be generated for any causal and human error analysis 

factors that lead to Safety Recommendations. 

B. MARINE CASUALTY TERMINOLOGY AND ANALYSIS REQUIREMENTS

The following details policy with regard to terminology used in marine casualty 

investigations for all levels of investigative effort. The IMO Code was adopted and 

modified by the Coast Guard to describe the facts and causes of the incidents we 

investigate, and is integrated as the conceptual underpinning of MISLE. Additionally, 

it eliminates the confusion that can arise when investigators arbitrarily choose one of 

the many causes at various levels as the “root cause.” The IMO approach yields that 

there is no single “root cause,” instead there are many causal factors that all 

contribute in some way to the incident. All other “root cause” language shall be 

avoided in order to minimize confusion. 

Marine casualty investigations that only reach the preliminary level of investigation 

require no analysis be completed beyond adequate fact-finding to determine that no 

further Coast Guard effort is required.

• Safety Recommendations: Shall develop safety recommendations when an

unsafe condition is identified over which control can be exercised but are 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 7: MARINE CASUALTY INVESTIGATION

B7-8 

B.2.e. Formal Level of Investigation 

C.1. INFORMATION 

REQUIRED FOR 

INCIDENTS REPORTED 

TO THE IMO 

When such information can reasonably be obtained, the following information must 

be contained in a marine casualty ROI which will be forwarded by CG-545 to the 

IMO: 

Involved Vessels 

• Name, IMO number, nationality, port of registry, call sign 

• Name and address of owners and operators, if applicable, also, if an overseas 

ship, of agents 

• Type of ship 

• Name and address of charterer, and type of charter 

• Deadweight, net and gross tonnages, and principal dimensions 

• Means of propulsion; particulars of engines 

• When, where and by whom built 

• Any relevant structural peculiarities 

• Amount of fuel carried, and position of fuel tanks 

• Radio (type, make) 

• Radar (number, type, make) 

• Gyro compass (make, model) 

• Automatic pilot (make, model) 

• Electronic positioning equipment (make, model) (GPS, Decca, etc.) 

• Life saving equipment (dates of survey/expiry) 

Documents 

(Note: Any documents that may have relevance to the investigation should be 

produced. Where possible original documents should be retained, otherwise 

authenticated and dated photocopies should be taken.) 

• Ship's register 

• Current statutory certificates 

• ISM Code certification 

• Classification society or survey authority certificates 

• Official log book 

• Crew list 

currently missing or inadequate. 

Marine casualty investigations that reach the formal level of investigation shall 

complete all steps within the investigative process: generating a timeline, causal 

analysis, human error analysis, conclusions and safety recommendations. 

Additionally, there must be evidence that corroborates every finding of fact. 

C. MARINE CASUALTIES AND INCIDENTS REPORTED TO THE 

INTERNATIONAL MARITIME ORGANIZATION (IMO) 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 7: MARINE CASUALTY INVESTIGATION

B7-9 

• Crew qualifications 

• Deck log book 

• Port log, log abstract and cargo log book 

• Engine movement book 

• Engine-room log book 

• Data logger print-out 

• Course recorder chart 

• Echo sounder chart 

• Oil record book 

• Soundings book 

• Night order book 

• Master's/Chief Engineer's Standing Orders 

• Company Standing Orders/Operations Manual 

• Company safety manual 

• Compass error book or records 

• Radar log book 

• Planned maintenance schedules 

• Repair requisition records 

• Articles of Agreement 

• Bar records - daily purchases - voyage receipts, etc.

• Records of drug and alcohol tests 

• Passenger list 

• Radio log 

• Ship reporting records 

• Voyage plan

• Charts and record of chart corrections 

• Equipment/machinery manufacturer's operational/maintenance manuals 

• Any other documentation relevant to the inquiry 

Particulars of the voyage 

• Port at which the voyage commenced and port at which it was to have ended, 

with dates/times 

• Details of cargo 

• Last port and date/time of departure 

• Draughts (forward, aft and amidships) and any list 

• Port bound for at time of occurrence 

• Any incident during the voyage that may have a material bearing on the 

incident, or unusual occurrence, whether or not it appears to be relevant to 

the incident 

• Plan view of ship’s layout including cargo spaces, slop tanks, bunker/fuel lube 

oil tanks (diagrams from IOPP Certificate) 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 7: MARINE CASUALTY INVESTIGATION

B7-10 

• Details of cargo, bunkers, fresh water and ballast and consumption 

Particulars of people involved in incident 

• Full name 

• Age 

• Details of injury 

• Description of accident 

• Person supervising activity

• First aid or other action on board 

• Capacity on board 

• Certificate of Competency/License: 

• Grade; 

• Date of issue; 

• Issuing country/authority; 

• Other Certificates of Competency held 

• Time spent on vessel concerned 

• Experience on similar vessels 

• Experience on other types of vessels 

• Experience in current capacity 

• Experience in other ranks 

• Number of hours spent on duty on that day and the previous days 

• Number of hours sleep in the 96 hours prior to the incident 

• Any other factors, on board or personal, that may have affected sleep 

• Whether smoker, and if so, quantity 

• Normal alcohol habit 

• Alcohol consumption immediately prior to incident or in the previous 24 

hours 

• Whether under prescribed medication 

• Any ingested non-prescribed drugs 

• Records of drug and alcohol tests 

Particulars of sea state, weather and tide 

• Direction and force of wind 

• Direction and state of sea and swell 

• Atmospheric conditions and visibility 

• State and height of tide 

• Direction and strength of tidal and other currents, bearing in mind local 

conditions 

Particulars of the incident 

• Type of incident 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 7: MARINE CASUALTY INVESTIGATION

B7-11 

• Date, time and place of incident 

• Details of incident and of the events leading up to it and following it 

• Details of the performance of relevant equipment with special regard to any 

malfunction 

• Persons on bridge 

• Persons in engine-room 

• Whereabouts of the master and chief engineer 

• Mode of steering (auto or manual) 

• Extracts from all relevant ship and, if applicable, shore documents including 

details of entries in official, bridge, scrap/rough and engine-room log books, 

data log printout, computer printouts, course and engine speed recorder, 

radar log, etc. 

• Details of communications made between vessel and radio stations, SAR 

centers and control centers, etc., with transcript of tape recordings where 

available 

• Details of any injuries/fatalities 

• Voyage data recorder information (if fitted) for analysis 

Assistance after the incident 

• If assistance was summoned, what form and by what means 

• If assistance was offered or given, by whom and of what nature, and whether 

it was effective and competent 

• If assistance was offered and refused, the reason for refusal 

Engine-room orders 

In all cases where a collision or grounding is the subject of an investigation, and the 

movements of the engine are involved, the master or officer on watch and other 

persons in a position to speak with knowledge are to be asked whether the orders to 

the engine-room were promptly carried out. If there is any doubt on the matter, the 

investigator must refer to it in the ROI. 

D.1. BASIC FIRE 

SCIENCE

D.1.a. Elements of Combustion 

According to current reference texts, four basic elements must be present for a fire to 

occur: 

• Combustible fuels; 

• An oxidizer (such as oxygen in air); 

• Energy as a means of ignition (primarily in the form of heat); and 

• A self-sustaining reaction between fuel and oxygen. 

D. VESSEL FIRES AND EXPLOSIONS

Removing any one of these four elements will extinguish a fire; all four elements must 

be addressed to explain a fire or explosion. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 7: MARINE CASUALTY INVESTIGATION

B7-12 

D.1.b. The Oxidation Reaction 

D.1.c. Flaming Fires 

D.1.d. Glowing Fires 

A glowing fire is one in which there is no flame, but the presence of very hot 

materials on the surface of a solid fuel indicates that combustion is occurring. In this 

type of fire, it is the solid fuel that is actually burning. The light emitted by the 

burning object’s surface depends upon the temperature of that surface itself. In a 

glowing fire, some sort of forced draft is usually necessary to keep supplying oxygen 

to the fire. An example is a forced draft charcoal fire. 

D.1.e. Explosions 

D.1.f. BLEVE 

The fundamental chemical reaction in fire is oxidation. In its most simple form, 

oxidation is simply the combining of atomic oxygen with other elements or 

compounds found in fuel. When less chemically stable compounds combine with 

oxygen to form a more stable compound (such as carbon monoxide or carbon 

dioxide), the reaction is usually exothermic, meaning that it releases energy, primarily 

in the form of heat. Most oxidation reactions (and thus most fires) fall into this 

category. It is important to note, however, that many other chemical and physical 

reactions (usually producing or releasing fuel) occur in a fire. 

Fires characterized by flame are the most common. In this type of fire, the flame 

actually is the fire: it is the gas that is burning. The light from the flame results from 

the chemical reaction of various elements; the color depends on the specific elements, 

their by-products, and the temperature of the combustion gases. In a flaming fire, 

gases in the fuel are released (or created by the heat), escape, mix with an oxidizing 

gas such as air, and burn. An example is an oxy-acetylene torch flame. 

An explosion is simply a type of fire in which the entire combustion occurs in a very 

short period of time. Generally, vapors, dusts, or gasses are premixed with air in 

precisely the right ratios (to little oxygen or too much will not allow an explosion), 

and the mixture is ignited. In this type of fire, it is again the gas that is burning. The 

very fast combustion can produce an enormous release of energy in the form of heat 

and explosive pressure. Examples include grain dust explosions and petroleum vapor 

explosions. 

When flammable liquids are packaged into airtight containers or pressure vessels, heat 

or fire can cause pressure caused by the expanding liquid can prevent its evaporation. 

Effectively, raising the atmospheric pressure in the pressure vessel raises the boiling 

temperature of the liquid. When a fire continues to add heat, the liquid fuel can 

pyrolize, decomposing into highly flammable vapors when the liquid is combustible, 

tremendously increasing the available fuel load for an explosion. When the container 

or PV ruptures under the increased internal pressure, the over-pressurized mixture of 

pyrolized vapors and spontaneously boiling liquid erupts with explosive force. This 

explosion is known as a Boiling Liquid Expanding Vapor Explosion (BLEVE). 

When the liquid in the container or PV is combustible, a BLEVE may be immediately 

followed by detonation of the escaping combustible vapors. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 7: MARINE CASUALTY INVESTIGATION

B7-13 

D.2. SEQUENCE OF 

A COMPARTMENT FIRE

D.2.a. Introduction 

D.2.b. Ignition 

D.2.c. Incipient Stage 

D.2.d. Free Burning Stage 

As the fire grows and more fuel is consumed, enough heat will be produced to ignite 

other materials in the compartment. The speed of this horizontal or lateral spread of 

flames depends on the density and combustibility of the fuels in the compartment. In 

general, a significant amount of plume gasses will be generated, which collect at the 

overhead and creep downward as they progressively blanket the compartment. 

Temperatures in this smoke/vapor layer will rise during the free-burning stage, 

though temperatures near the deck may remain relatively low. When ventilation in 

the compartment is limited, combustion efficiency will normally decrease, and a fuel 

and oxygen rich vapor layer is produced above the flames but beneath the smoke 

layer at the overhead. This fuel and oxygen rich layer will build and move lower until 

ignited by open flames or radiation, a mini-explosion. Flares of this fuel and oxygen 

rich layer can ignite other fuels and greatly spread the fire. Once the temperatures in 

the compartment reach a sufficiently high level (usually over 1100 degrees F), all the 

materials in the compartment will spontaneously ignite (given sufficient oxygen); this 

is “flashover.” 

D.2.e. Smoldering Stage 

In general, fires in a compartment with a normal fuel load go through four welldefined stages in their lifetime. Each stage has its own characteristics and effects on 

the fuels in the compartment. IOs should be aware of these four stages so that they 

may accurately assess the stage and progression of a fire through various 

compartments. 

The primary igniter for virtually every fire is simple heat. In general, typical class A 

fires are ignited by hot objects (including electrical-resistance heated wires), friction 

(which produces heat), radiant heat from exhaust flues, static electricity, exothermic 

chemical reactions and other sources ignition. In general, for ignition to occur, the 

heat produced must be hotter than the “ignition temperature” of the fuel it 

encounters, and sufficient oxygen must be present to sustain the oxidation reaction. 

The incipient stage begins the moment after ignition. In general, the flames are 

contained and there is typically a free-burning flame. The compartment will generally 

have normal oxygen content (~21%), and temperature in the room has not yet begun 

to rise. As the free-burning flame burns, a plume of hot gasses containing soot, water 

vapor, and solids, will rise from the flame. These gasses rise to the overhead and 

displace normal air downward, where the oxygen fuels the growing fire. If there is 

fuel above the burning flame, it spreads upward and outward, producing the 

characteristic V-pattern of stains and char. 

As fuel or oxygen is exhausted (oxygen below 16%), open-flame burning diminishes 

or is extinguished. At this point, the fire changes to the glowing combustion, with 

high temperatures continuing. Glowing combustion can continue to produce fuelrich vapors. Should these vapors suddenly encounter a new source of oxygen, the 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 7: MARINE CASUALTY INVESTIGATION

B7-14 

D.3. TRACING THE 

COURSE OF THE FIRE

D.3.a. Introduction 

D.3.b. Fires burn upward 

D.3.c. Insufficient fuel causes a fire to burn out 

D.3.d. Fires can be diverted by ventilation or radiant 

ignition 

D.3.e. Vertical spread is enhanced by “ chimneys ”

D.3.f. Downward spread, while less common, can occur 

D.3.g. Fires generally spread like a hot gas 

compartment can “flashback” in an explosive nature. In most cases, however, heat 

and oxygen (assuming there is no ventilation) further dissipate and the fire is selfextinguished. 

The fundamental task in fire investigation is reconstructing the sequence of events 

backwards from the ashes. With the exception of explosion-caused fires, almost 

every fire begins with a small flame that spreads. Accordingly, IOs should focus their 

attention on tracing the small flame as it grew into a larger fire. This section discusses 

general rules of fire behavior useful in tracing the fire. 

In general, hot gases are lighter than surrounding air, and therefore rise. Absent 

strong ventilation or a physical barrier, fires will generally burn upwards, though a 

much lesser degree of downward travel may also occur. 

Fires spread because they encounter fuel above or to the side of them that can be 

ignited. When insufficient fuel is present above and to the sides, the fire is generally 

self-limiting and will burn out. 

Air currents can deflect a flame, causing the fire to spread in a more horizontal 

fashion than would normally occur (fires burn upward). When evaluating a fire’s 

spread, the IO must pay close attention to all possible sources of air currents. 

Similarly, horizontal surfaces can block a fire’s upward progress. When these surfaces 

become extremely hot, however, they may become a secondary, radiant source of 

ignition for fuels adjacent to them. In this fashion, fires may progress vertically 

despite a horizontal barrier. IOs should be conscious of this possible phenomenon 

and closely consider the possibility of radiant ignition in secondary compartments. 

Stairways, elevators, air ducts, and so on can carry away heated gasses, providing 

enhanced draft for fires. These chimney-like arrangements can also serve as a route 

of rapid vertical flame spread. IOs should be particularly sensitive to pre-fire 

configurations which may have facilitated the chimney effect.

Fires usually spread downward when burning solids or liquids fall down onto 

combustible materials, or when surfaces (usually decks) become so hot that they 

become secondary, radiant sources of ignition for the compartments beneath. The 

flame damage patterns in downward spread situations can be confusing, and IOs 

should consider seeking advice from fire investigation experts when they believe 

downward spread may have been a significant factor. In general, the downward 

spread of a fire will be controlled almost entirely by the amount and type of fuels 

present in the lower compartment. 

As a broad generalization, fire tends to spread as though it were a hot gas: upward in 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 7: MARINE CASUALTY INVESTIGATION

B7-15 

D.3.h. Fire suppression efforts affect flame spread 

D.3.i. Liquid fuels produce different burn patterns 

D.4. INSPECTING 

THE FIRE SCENE

D.4.a. Sequence of the Inspection 

D.4.b. Heat Horizon 

D.4.c. Smoke Horizon 

D.4.d. Glass 

relatively straight lines, and outward around barriers. 

When recreating the spread of a fire, IOs must keep in mind that fire suppression 

efforts on one fire front can force the fire back into other areas which were not 

involved. Similarly, fire suppression can force downward spread, and even under 

obstacles. When a protracted fire-fighting effort was involved, the IO should 

consider the sequence of attacks made on the fire and their possible effects on fire 

spread. 

Predictably, liquids tend to pool in the lowest available area. Because liquids do not 

burn directly (it is the vapors that burn), heavier liquids will tend to “wick” when 

porous solids are available, causing an unusual burn pattern. Additionally, most solid 

fuel compartment fires leave less burn trace in the corners of the compartment 

because these areas are dead air spaces. In liquid fuel fires, however, burning liquids 

can reach corners causing a more uniform burn pattern. 

IOs should begin their on-scene inspection by examining the external structures in 

order to determine both the limits of the fire damage and the areas of heaviest 

damage. During this walk-through, IOs should note sources of ventilation supplying 

the fire area. Once the perimeter has been established, the IO should follow a spiral 

search pattern, working towards the center of the fire. During the course of the 

search, IOs should note and record using a diagram any dropped equipment or clear 

signs of fire-fighting efforts. In general, IOs should follow a fire path from the least 

damaged area to the most damaged area, usually the source of the fire. 

In general, the height at which significant heat was present in a compartment can be 

detected by the burning, blistering, or discoloration of paint and other structural 

materials (the “heat horizon”). In an unventilated compartment, gases will rise and 

distribute uniformly along the overhead, causing the heat horizon to be level to the 

floor. When a heat horizon is not flat, this is an indication that ventilation or a 

chimney effect was in play in the compartment. IOs must remain aware that a vessel 

list or ventilation during fire-fighting can also cause “tipped” heat horizons. When 

clear heat horizons are present in a compartment, the IO should consider measuring 

and recording the heat horizon on a vertical diagram of the compartment.

Similarly, smoke can discolor or stain walls, overheads, and even glass (the smoke 

horizon). Because smoke rises as a gas, in an unventilated compartment, the smoke 

horizon will be level with the floor. Tipped smoke horizons may also be signs of 

ventilation or chimneys. When clear smoke horizons are present, the IO should note 

them separately from the heat horizon. 

Glass can be a valuable indicator of fire spread. Although glass appears to be a solid, 

it is in fact a super-cooled liquid. As a liquid, glass will bow and flex until its internal 

stresses cause it to shatter. When glass shatters, either from mechanical impact or 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 7: MARINE CASUALTY INVESTIGATION

B7-16 

D.5. ELECTRICAL 

FIRES

D.6. IMO

SUGGESTED FIRE 

AND EXPLOSION 

QUESTIONS

To the extent that such information is available, IOs should collect the following 

information about each fire and explosion: 

• How was the ship alerted to the fire? 

• How was the individual alerted to the fire? 

• Where did it start? 

• How did it start (if known)? 

• What was the immediate action taken?

• Condition of fire-fighting equipment, supported by dates of 

survey/examination 

• Extinguishers available: 

• Type available in the vicinity; 

• Types available on the ship; 

• Types used 

• Hoses available/used 

• Pumps available/used 

• Was water immediately available? 

• Were air vents closed off to the space?

• What was the nature of the material on fire and surrounding the fire? 

• Fire retardant specification of bulkheads surrounding the fire 

• Restrictions caused by (a) smoke, (b) heat, (c) fumes 

• Freedom of access 

• Access availability for fire fighting equipment 

• Preparedness of crew - frequency, duration, content and locations of fire 

musters and drills 

thermal stress, it breaks in radial and concentric circle patterns, producing the familiar 

“spider web” pattern. Depending on soot or ash deposits on the broken edges of 

glass, the IO can tell when in the sequence of the fire the glass was broken. Crazed 

(microfactured) glass usually indicates a rapid a flash fire causing rapid thermal change 

and, thus, stress throughout the glass. Melted glass in windows and light bulbs can 

indicate the direction of fire travel, as glass will melt first where it first encounters 

flame, causing it to “belly in” toward the direction the flame. When using glass to 

determine the direction of flame spread, IOs should assure themselves that the glass 

has not been disturbed during firefighting efforts, which would invalidate any 

conclusions drawn from it. 

The central questions with regard to electrical systems in fire investigation are: 1) Was 

conductor/wiring melting caused by the fire? or 2) Was the fire caused by an electrical 

failure? Generally, the IO should trace the electrical system in a compartment 

affected by fire. Examining the insulation, etc., of the unburned portions of the 

wiring will typically reveal clues on these questions. IOs should also check breakers, 

fuses, and contacts. Similarly, the IO should remain sensitive to the electrical devices 

located within the compartment, noting their positions in relation to the burn pattern 

in the compartment. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 7: MARINE CASUALTY INVESTIGATION

B7-17 

E.1. NAVIGATION 

CASUALTIES

See 46 CFR 4.05 

E.1.a. General 

Navigation casualties that occur can be primarily grouped into three major categories: 

collisions, allisions and groundings. 

E.1.b. Definition of a Collision 

E.1.c. Definition of an Allision 

E.1.d. Definition of a Grounding 

E.2. DETECTION 

OF NAVIGATION TYPE 

CASUALTIES 

Generally, the vast majority of navigation type casualties will be detected through 

passive modes as a result of the reporting requirements found in 46 CFR 4.05-1 and 

4.05-10. However, IOs should pay particular attention to the incident history of a 

particular vessel, organization, person, facility, or waterway. In many cases, a repeated 

history of accidents by a single company (perhaps on many vessels) or a high number 

of casualties on a specific waterway may indicate a latent unsafe condition endemic to 

the company or of that particular location. Accordingly, IOs are strongly encouraged 

to view their detection efforts within the context of patterns of incidents. 

E.3. TIMELY 

ARRIVAL TO AN 

INCIDENT SITE

E4. SECURING THE 

INCIDENT SCENE 

E.4.a. Securing the Wheelhouse 

• Response by land-based fire-fighting brigades 

E. VESSEL NAVIGATION INCIDENTS

Because of the complex nature of some of these occurrences, IOs are encouraged to 

seek expert advice. 

A collision is the running of two vessels, both of which are underway, against one 

another. See Black’s Law Dictionary

An allision is the running of one vessel into or against a vessel not underway or 

against another object not underway, including a buoy, pier, piling, dolphin, or other 

fixed structure. See Black’s Law Dictionary. 

A grounding is the drifting, driving, or running aground of a ship on a shore or a 

strand. Accidental grounding takes place where a ship is driven on shore by the 

winds and the waves. Voluntary grounding takes place where the ship is run on shore 

either to preserve her from a worse fate or for some fraudulent purpose. 

It is imperative during the fact-finding stage of an investigation to arrival at the 

casualty site as quickly as possible in order to secure the scene, collect evidence and 

interview witnesses. This is particularly important for navigation related casualties 

such as collisions, allisions and groundings. 

In cases of a navigation type casualty, the wheelhouse should be secured as soon as 

possible following the incident. However, an IO should never hinder the safe 

navigation and maneuvering of the vessel. Optimally, the wheelhouse should be left 

unchanged until the investigation team has inspected it. When this is not possible 

due to the need for the vessel to make essential and immediate maneuvers, the scene 

should be documented by photographs, audio visual recordings or sketches or any 

other relevant means available with the main objective of preserving vital evidence 

and possibly recreating the circumstances at a later date. Of particular importance is 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 7: MARINE CASUALTY INVESTIGATION

B7-18 

E.4.b. Secure Critical Documentary Evidence 

The IO shall, to the best of their ability, immediately collect and secure the following 

critical documentary evidence following a navigation-related casualty. All other 

documentary evidence can be gathered at a less critical pace during the investigation. 

(Collected evidence should occur in the presence of a witness.) 

• Charts and Publications - Collect and secure those charts used in voyage 

planning and transit as well as all applicable Light Lists and Coast Pilots in use 

at the time of the casualty. This also includes rapid plots or any job aids that 

might have been used during the evolution of the incident. 

• Course Recorder – Course recorder data should be retrieved with any time

difference and gyro repeater error noted. 

• Voyage Data Recorder 

• Engine Control Recorder (Bell Logger) – Retrieve data from the recorder

with any time differences noted. Engine control room may also have a 

separate Engine Control Recorder. 

• Bell Books – Collect both Wheelhouse and Engine Bell Books. 

• Log Books – Official and rough (working) log books in both the wheelhouse 

and engine control room. 

• Standing Orders and Guiding Procedures – The master will post standing 

orders for all watch officers to abide by. These will be in terms of both 

general guidance to follow during a navigational watch or can be very specific 

regarding a specific navigational watch or evolution expected during a 

particular watch. This customarily includes general cautionary guidance such

as minimum allowable closest point of approach (CPA) for vessel traffic, 

course changes and conditions when the master should be called to assist the 

watchstanders.

• Radar Recorder – Some radar equipment, such as certain ARPA models, 

may have an internal recording device. Contact the manufacturer for 

instructions on data retrieval. 

• Navigation Equipment – Some navigation equipment, such as certain 

models of GPS’s and LORAN’s, may have an internal recording device. 

Contact the manufacturer for instructions on data retrieval. 

 Recall and record the navigational waypoints entered and used during 

the vessel’s transit. This should be done by a navigational watchstander 

and witnessed by the IO.

 Look for labels or notes placed on or near the navigational equipment. 

This may indicate difficulty in using the equipment.

 Note all navigational alarms in use during the transit. 

the recording of the positions of individuals at the site, the condition and position of 

equipment (and controls), supervisory instructions, guiding procedures and recording 

charts. Damage or failed components should be kept in a secure location to await the 

arrival of the investigation team who may require detailed scientific examination of 

certain key objects. Such key objects should be carefully marked. 

 Note if navigational equipment receiver is actually receiving a signal or is 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 7: MARINE CASUALTY INVESTIGATION

B7-19 

E.4.c. Collection of Physical Evidence – A Critical 

Eye 

When an IO first arrives on scene and proper introductions are complete with the 

vessel master or ship’s representative, the IO should immediately proceed to the 

control station used at the time of the casualty. This may be referred to as the bridge, 

wheelhouse, pilothouse or steering station. Once there, the IO should start collecting 

occurrence data but should also take time to look at “big picture” items such as the 

general condition and layout of navigational and control equipment. IOs should take 

particular note of the following: 

• Watch Standing Station – Note where the watchstanders conduct their 

normal routine or duties.

• Visibility – Note the range of visibility from where the navigational 

watchstander conducts his or her duties. Note obstructions or things that 

would hinder their view.

• Windshield – Is the windshield clean and clear? Is there a usable wash-down 

system to routinely clean the windshield? Are the windshield wipers 

functional and in good condition? Is the vessel fitted with sun shades? Does 

the windshield, by virtue of its design, reflect interior lighting?

• Chart Room or Table – Note the location and layout. Does it permit easy

access and allow the watch officer to maintain an adequate lookout?

• Navigation Equipment – Note the layout and functionality of the 

navigational equipment. Can the display information be seen visually or 

alarms be heard in the wheelhouse area.

• Posted Job Aids – Often, especially if a vessel has a steady transit, the crew 

will create job aids or small working charts to use instead of the larger, more

cumbersome nautical charts. Check for their use and accuracy. Also, 

reminders or job aids might be posted throughout the workplace. Note any 

that you see as they might be indicative of operational difficulties or 

problems. Vessels on a regular run may also use a Plexiglas overlay and plot 

positions using a grease pencil. 

• Navigational Procedures or Guidance – Note the location of vessel 

operational guidance. Note its accessibility, ease of use, and apparent signs of 

use such as worn bindings and pages.

E.5. COLLECTION 

OF OCCURRENCE DATA 

E.5.a. General Casualty Data –All Cases 

To the extent that such information is available, IOs should collect the following 

information about each casualty: 

• Casualty type 

• Date and local time of casualty 

• Position/Location of casualty – Latitude and Longitude, bearing and distance 

from a known point or river mile marker reference. 

in dead reckoning mode. 

• Deceptive Behaviour of Crew - Note any attempt by crewmembers to be 

deceptive. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 7: MARINE CASUALTY INVESTIGATION

B7-20 

• Vessel(s) involved 

• Consequences 

• Weather at time of casualty 

• Visibility 

• Waterbody type 

• Sea conditions 

• Tidal/current conditions 

• Water depth 

• Aids to navigation used 

• Failure of aids to navigation 

E.5.b. Vessel Related Data – All Cases 

To the extent that such information is available, IOs should collect the following 

vessel related information: 

• Name of vessel 

• Previous name(s) 

• Nationality (Flag) 

• Previous nationality(s) (Flag(s)) 

• Documentation Number (IMO Number, State Number) 

• Home port 

• Vessel type/service 

• Call sign 

• Gross tonnage 

• Deadweight 

• Length overall 

• Beam 

• Drafts – Fore, aft, midships 

 Leaving port

 At time of casualty (best estimate) 

 After casualty (best estimate) 

• List 

• Propulsion type and particulars 

• Hull construction 

• Hull material 

• Classification society 

• Previous Class Society 

• Registered ship owner 

• Ship manager/operator 

• Date of contract/keel laid/delivery 

• Date of major conversion 

• Vessel Traffic Service used
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 7: MARINE CASUALTY INVESTIGATION

B7-21 

• Building yard 

• Hull number 

• Port at which voyage commenced and port at which it was to have ended, 

with dates 

• Details of cargo 

• Last port and date of departure 

• Port bound for at time of occurrence 

• Any incident during the voyage that may have a material bearing on the 

incident, or unusual occurrence, whether or not it appears to be relevant to 

the incident 

• Plan view of ship’s layout including cargo spaces, slop tanks, bunker/fuel lube 

oil tanks (diagrams from IOPP Certificate) 

• Details of cargo, bunkers, fresh water and ballast and consumption 

E.5.c. Documentary Evidence – All Cases 

Any documents that may have relevance to the investigation should be produced. 

Where possible original documents should be retained onboard the vessel, otherwise 

authenticated and dated photocopies should be taken. However, if an IO is 

presented with a suspected false record book or license or other documents the IO 

believes to be false they should take the original documents. 

• Ship's register 

• Current statutory certificates 

• ISM Code certification 

• Classification society or survey authority certificates 

• Official log book 

• Crew list 

• Crew qualifications 

• Deck log book 

• Port log, log abstract and cargo log book 

• Engine movement book 

• Engine-room log book 

• Data logger print-out 

• Course recorder chart 

• Echo sounder chart 

• Oil record book 

• Soundings book 

• Night order book 

• Master's/Chief Engineer's Standing Orders 

• Company Standing Orders/Operations Manual 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 7: MARINE CASUALTY INVESTIGATION

B7-22 

• Company Safety Manual 

• Compass error book or records 

• Radar log book 

• Planned maintenance schedules 

• Repair requisition records 

• Articles of Agreement 

• Bar records - daily purchases - voyage receipts, etc.

• Records of drug and alcohol tests 

• Passenger list 

• Radio log 

• Ship reporting records 

• Voyage plan

• Charts and record of chart corrections 

• Equipment/machinery manufacturer's operational/maintenance manuals 

• Any other documentation relevant to the inquiry 

E.5.d. Data Regarding Collisions/Allisions/Groundings 

To the extent that such information is available, Investigating Officers (IOs) should 

collect the following information about each collision, allision or grounding. If it is 

possible, the IO should acquire a graphical representations of the information as well 

as oral testimony: 

• Time, position, course and speed (and method by which established), when

presence of other involved ship first became known or when a possibility of 

grounding became evident 

• Details of all subsequent alterations of course and speed up to 

collision/allision or grounding by own ship 

• Bearing, distance and heading of other ship, if sighted visually, time of 

sighting, and subsequent alterations 

• Bearing and distance of other ship, if observed by radar, timing of 

observations and subsequent alterations of bearing 

• If other ship was plotted and by what method (auto-plot, reflection plotter, 

etc.), and copy of plot, if available 

• Check performance of navigation equipment 

• Course recorder 

• Engine event recorder 

• Lights/day signals carried and operated in ship, and those seen in other ship 

• Sound signals, including fog signals, made by ship and when, and those heard 

from other ship and when 

• If a listening watch was kept on VHF radio channel 16, or other frequency, 

and any messages sent, received or overheard 

• Number of radars carried on ship, number operational at time of casualty, 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 7: MARINE CASUALTY INVESTIGATION

B7-23 

together with ranges used on each radar 

• Whether steering by hand or automatic 

• Check that steering was operating correctly 

• Details of look-out 

• Nature and extent of damage 

E.5.e. Vessel Navigation/Control information to 

collect 

To the extent that such information is available, Investigating Officers (IOs) should 

collect the following data regarding each navigation and control system onboard the 

vessel. Information should include model type, condition and operating status and 

limitations of the following systems: 

• Global Positioning System (GPS) – While this is a very accurate navigational 

system there may be some signal variation due to solar activity and variations 

in the magnetic field of the earth. Check with the equipment manufacturer or 

the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) for more 

information. 

 Signal reception strength 

 Display 

 Waypoints used 

 Alarms 

 Antenna condition 

 Job aids/operations manual 

• Radar 

 Ranges used 

 Band used 

 Control settings 

 Target strength 

 Display contrast and brightness 

 Filters used (rain or sea clutter) 

 Panel light intensity 

 Condition of hood 

 Plotting method 

 Display (head up or North stabilised) 

 Repeater error 

 Antenna condition 

 Maintenance records 

 Job aids/operations manual 

• ARPA 

 Slave or master? 

 Primary use 

9 Vessel Traffic 

• Compliance with statutory requirement to give name and nationality to other

ship and to stand by after collision 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 7: MARINE CASUALTY INVESTIGATION

B7-24 

9 Navigation 

o Ground lock used? 

 Ranges used 

 Control settings 

 Target strength 

 Display contrast and brightness 

 Filters used (rain or sea clutter) 

 Panel light intensity 

 Plotting method 

 Display (head up or North stabilised) 

 Repeater error 

 Trial manoeuvres used 

 Maintenance records 

 Job ads/operations manual 

• LORAN 

 Plotting method (LOP’s or LAT, LONG) 

 Adequacy of Lines of Position (LOP’s) (intersection angles) 

 Antenna condition 

• Radio direction finder (RDF) 

 Reference point employed 

 Correction applied 

 Antenna condition 

• Celestial Navigation 

• Terrestrial Navigation 

 Fixes obtained 

 LOP’s 

• Other positioning system 

• Fathometer 

 Transponder location 

• Fathograph 

 Transponder location 

• Speed Log Transponder location 

 Doppler 

 Other 

 Transponder location 

• Rate of Swing indicator 

• Whistle 

• Horn 

• Running lights 

• Signal lights, signal flags 

• MSDD 

• Radiotelegraph and/or radiotelephone 

• Compasses (magnetic, gyro, repeaters) including error 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 7: MARINE CASUALTY INVESTIGATION

B7-25 

• Course recorder 

• Rudder angle indicator 

• Tachometer 

• Chart(s) in use 

• Coast Pilots, sailing directions, local instructions 

• Notices to Mariners 

• Safety Management System procedures used 

• Company instructions 

• Standing orders and night orders; 

• Deck and engineroom bell books 

• Deck and engineroom logs 

• Steering system 

• Steering gear 

• Throttle or engine control type 

• Auto pilot 

• Bridge to engineroom signal system 

E.5.f. Information to Collect from Each Involved Party 

E.5.g. Involved Party Checklist 

• First Name 

• Middle Name 

• Last Name 

• Unique ID # (SSN, Passport) 

• License Number 

• Type of License 

• Issuing Authority 

• Country 

• Expiration Date 

• Time License Held 

• Document Number 

• Type of Document 

• Issuing Authority 

• Country 

• Expiration Date 

• Time Document Held 

• Age 

• Height 

• Weight 

• Public announcement system 

To the extent that such information is available, IOs should collect the following 

information regarding each individual involved in a casualty: 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 7: MARINE CASUALTY INVESTIGATION

B7-26 

• Sex 

• Restrictions/Limitations/Disabilities 

• Nation of Origin 

• Native Language 

• Language in use aboard ship 

• Position served on board 

• Date reported aboard 

• Familiarization conducted? 

• Years/months in grade 

• Years/months with company 

• Years/months on board 

• Years/months in industry 

• Date/time reported for watch 

• Normal length of watch 

• Number of watches/day 

• Person’s line supervisor 

• Employer (company) hours on watch when incident occurred 

• Off-watch duties 

• Hours awake counting back from incident to last sleep period: 

• Hours of sleep in 24 hours before incident: 

• Location at time of incident: 

• Activity at time of incident 

• Equipment being used at time of incident 

• People in vicinity at time of incident: 

• People interacting with at time of incident 

E.5.h. Change Analysis - What was different this 

time? 

E.6. DIAGRAMS IOs should make all attempts necessary to get a graphical representation of what each 

involved party saw during the evolution of a casualty. This is particularly important in 

navigational type casualties. 

In developing the collision case, the use of diagrams is highly desirable. Each 

principal navigation witness should be required to draw a diagram showing the 

relative positions of the two vessels at the time they began navigating with respect to 

each other. This should be followed by similar diagrams at other important points in 

the witness' testimony. Each diagram should be clearly labeled (e.g., "Relative 

In many casualty cases, people are surprised a casualty occurs because they have safely 

completed the task at hand so many times before. Therefore, IOs should always 

apply ‘Change Analysis’ and ask, “what did they do differently this time” or “what 

conditions were different this time?” 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 7: MARINE CASUALTY INVESTIGATION

B7-27 

positions of the two vessels when I sounded the first one blast signal" or "Relative 

positions of the two vessels when I ordered full astern," etc.). The final diagram 

should show the two vessels at the time of impact. 

E.7. DIRECTION 

OF THE 

INVESTIGATION

E.8. IMO

SUGGESTED 

QUESTIONS ABOUT 

COLLISIONS -

GENERAL

To the extent that such information is available, IOs should collect the following 

information about each collision involving foreign flagged vessels: 

• Local or other special rules for navigation 

• Obstructions, if any, to maneuvering, e.g. by a third vessel, shallow or narrow 

waters, beacon, buoy, etc. 

• Circumstances affecting visibility and audibility, e.g. state of the sun, dazzle of 

shore lights, strength of wind, ship-board noise and whether any door or 

window could obstruct look-out and/or audibility 

• Geographical plot 

• Possibilities of interaction 

• Name, IMO number, nationality and other details of other vessel

E.9. IMO

SUGGESTED 

QUESTIONS FOR EACH 

SHIP

To the extent that such information is available, IOs should collect the following 

information about each collision: 

• Time, position, course and speed (and method by which established), when

presence of other ship first became known 

• Details of all subsequent alterations of course and speed up to collision by 

own ship 

• Bearing, distance and heading of other ship, if sighted visually, time of 

sighting, and subsequent alterations 

• Bearing and distance of other ship, if observed by radar, timing of 

observations and subsequent alterations of bearing 

• If other ship was plotted and by what method (auto-plot, reflection plotter, 

etc.), and copy of plot, if available 

• Check performance of equipment 

• Course recorder 

• Lights/day signals carried and operated in ship, and those seen in other ship 

For other navigation casualty types, the use of diagrams by the witness can be useful 

in visualizing the location of objects in relation to one another. Their use should not 

be overlooked neither for establishing vessel track lines in collision and grounding 

cases nor for explaining vessel, machinery, and piping arrangements. 

Very rarely does a collision occur without fault on the part of one or more of the 

involved vessels. In most instances, these faults occur because the navigational watch 

officers of one or both vessels depart from the COLREGs because they are 

attempting to guess the intentions of the other. IOs must be careful to explore 

departures from the actions required by the COLREGs. When a departure is found, 

the IO should carefully consider communications with the second vessel (if any), and 

should explore the watch officer’s beliefs at the time with regard to the second 

vessel’s intentions. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 7: MARINE CASUALTY INVESTIGATION

B7-28 

• Sound signals, including fog signals, made by ship and when, and those heard 

from other ship and when 

• If a listening watch was kept on VHF radio channel 16, or other frequency, 

and any messages sent, received or overheard 

• Number of radars carried on ship, number operational at time of casualty, 

together with ranges used on each radar 

• Whether steering by hand or automatic 

• Check that steering was operating correctly 

• Details of look-out 

• The parts of each ship which first came into contact and the angle between 

ships at that time 

• Nature and extent of damage 

E.10. IMO

SUGGESTED 

QUESTIONS ABOUT 

GROUNDINGS

To the extent that such information is available, IOs should collect the following 

information about each grounding: 

• Details of voyage plan, or evidence of voyage planning 

• Last accurate position and how obtained 

• Subsequent opportunities for fixing position or position lines, by celestial or 

terrestrial observations, GPS, radio, radar or otherwise, or by lines of 

soundings and, if not taken, why not 

• Chart datum comparison to GPS and other datum 

• Subsequent weather and tidal or other currents experienced 

• Effect on compass of any magnetic cargo, electrical disturbance or local 

attraction 

• Radar/s in use, respective ranges used, and evidence of radar performance 

monitoring and logging 

• Charts, sailing directions and relevant notices to mariners held, if corrected to 

date, and if any warnings they contain had been observed 

• Depth sounding taken, when and by what means

• Tank soundings taken, when and by what means 

• Draught of ship before grounding and how determined 

• Position of grounding and how determined 

• Cause and nature of any engine or steering failure before the grounding 

• Readiness of anchors, their use and effectiveness 

• Nature and extent of damage 

• Action taken, and movements of ship, after grounding 

(Note: information as in cases of foundering may also be required) 

E.11. IMO

SUGGESTED 

QUESTIONS ABOUT 

To the extent that such information is available, IOs should collect the following 

information about each foundering: 

• Compliance with statutory requirement to give name and nationality to other

ship and to stand by after collision
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 7: MARINE CASUALTY INVESTIGATION

B7-29 

FOUNDERING • Draft and freeboard on leaving last port and changes consequent upon 

consumption of stores and fuel 

• Freeboard appropriate to zone and date 

• Loading procedures, hull stresses 

• Particulars of any alterations to hull or equipment, since survey, and by whom

such alterations sanctioned 

• Condition of ship, possible effects on seaworthiness

• Stability data and when determined 

• Factors affecting stability, e.g. structural alterations, nature, weight, 

distribution and shift of any cargo and ballast, free surface in tanks or of loose 

water in ship

• Subdivision by watertight bulkheads 

• Position of, and watertight integrity of, hatches, scuttles, ports and other 

openings 

• Number and capacity of pumps and their effectiveness; the position of 

suctions 

• Cause and nature of water first entering ship 

• Other circumstances leading up to foundering 

• Measures taken to prevent foundering 

• Position where ship foundered and how established 

F.1. STABILITY F.1.a. General 

IOs need to have a basic knowledge of stability. However, IOs must also understand 

that this is a complex field of study and they should contact the CG-545 or the 

Marine Safety Center (MSC) for any in-depth stability calculations and/or analysis. 

Stability is the ability of a vessel to return to its original condition or position, after 

some external force has disturbed it. There are two opposing forces constantly acting 

upon a floating vessel. The force of gravity (G) acts vertically downward through the 

ship's center of gravity and the center of buoyancy (B) keeps a vessel afloat acting 

vertically upward through a vessel. In general, the stability of a vessel depends 

broadly upon the proper management of these forces. 

Further, other forces such as wind, waves and weather act on a vessel and also 

influence stability. These forces cause a vessel to move in various ways depending 

upon vessel design, the condition of the vessel loading, and the wind, waves and 

weather. There are six principal motions of a vessel, each affecting a vessel’s control 

and navigation: 

• Roll - motion about the vessel’s longitudinal axis. 

• Pitch - motion about the vessel’s transverse axis 

• Life-saving appliances provided and used, and any difficulties experienced in 

their use

F. STABILITY RELATED INCIDENTS
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 7: MARINE CASUALTY INVESTIGATION

B7-30 

• Yaw - motion bout the vessel’s vertical axis 

• Heave - vertical bodily motion of the vessel 

• Sway – lateral, side to side bodily motion 

• Surge – longitudinal bodily motion 

In their daily operations, mariners are mostly concerned with roll. 

There are other factors that directly affect stability. Three more will be discussed: 

• Trim - The difference between the forward and after drafts, in excess of 

design. 

• List – A state of equilibrium in an inclined position to one side (port or 

starboard). 

• Heel – To be inclined (either continuously or momentary) to one side (port 

or starboard). 

F.1.b. Stability Incidents 

F.1.c. Loading Issues / Weight Shifts 

When conducting marine casualty investigations of where loading issues or weight 

shifts were a factor, the following information should be collected, at a minimum: 

• Quantity of weight added or shifted; 

• Location of weight added or distance shifted; 

• Information on list or heel; 

• Draft fore and aft; 

• Trim; 

• Tank levels; and 

F.1.d. Flooding 

For our purposes, flooding is the influx of water penetrating the watertight envelope of 

a vessel or other structure due to some unintended occurrence. This can be via 

downflooding or when the hull is breeched. 

Progressive flooding is uncontrolled flooding. 

Per 46 CFR 28.510, downflooding is defined as the entry of seawater through any 

opening into the hull or superstructure of an undamaged vessel due to heel, trim or 

submergence of the vessel. 

In general, trim and list are and can be controlled by ship’s personnel. Heel is an 

external force placed upon the vessel.

Stability incidents usually result from loading issues/weight shifts, flooding, or both. 

These incidents include, but are not limited to, sinking/capsizing /foundering with 

causal factors in flooding, icing, loading (and all operations involving loading), lack of 

maintaining water/weather tightness, etc. See Section E.11 for IMO questions. 

• Additional weight normally maintained or newly placed on the vessel. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 7: MARINE CASUALTY INVESTIGATION

B7-31 

When conducting marine casualty investigations involving flooding, a determination 

must be made (primarily by inspecting the watertight envelope) as to whether it was 

downflooding, or the result of a breech of the watertight envelope. Following that 

determination, other factors, including the following, should be addressed: 

• Downflooding; 

o Loading 

o Weather 

o Compartmentation / Watertight / Weather tight integrity 

maintenance 

o Possible flood rate 

o Dewatering capabilities 

o Flooding alarms 

o Evaluation of lifesaving equipment / procedures 

• Flooding (via watertight envelope breech) 

o Location / cause of the breech 

o Compartmentation / Watertight / Weather tight integrity 

maintenance 

o Possible flood rate 

o Dewatering capabilities 

o Flooding alarms 

F.2. USEFUL 

INFORMATION FOR 

THE IO 

F.2.a. Ship’s Hull Markings 

Calculative Draft Marks 

Used for determining displacement and other properties of the ship for stability and 

damage control. These draft marks indicate the depth of the keel below the waterline. 

Two possible marking systems: 

• Roman numerals 3" in height (prior to 1972) 

• Arabic numerals 6" in height 

Navigational Draft Marks 

Ship’s operating drafts. These draft marks include the depth of any projections below 

the keel of the ship. 

F.2.b. Plimsoll Marks (Load lines) 

Plimsoll marks are markings of minimum allowable freeboard for registered cargocarrying ships. They are located amidships on both the port and starboard sides of the 

ship. 

Since the required minimum freeboard varies with water density and severity of 

weather, different markings are used as in the diagram below: 

o Evaluation of lifesaving equipment / procedures 

• Arabic numerals 6" in height 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 7: MARINE CASUALTY INVESTIGATION

TF - Tropical Fresh Water 

F - Fresh Water 

T - Tropical Water (sea water)

S - Standard Summer 

W - Winter

WNA - Winter North Atlantic 

F.2.c. Flood Rates 

The following is a table that provides sample flood rates for various hole diameters at 

different depths below the waterline based on the formula: 

Q=C*A*sqrt(H) 

• Where Q is equal to the flow rate (varying units based on “C”) 

• C is a constant (3600 for gallons per minute (GPM), 8 for cubic feet per 

second (CFS), and 825 for tons per hour (TPH) 

• A is the hole area in square feet 

• H is the depth of the center of the hole below the surface in feet. 

B7-32 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 7: MARINE CASUALTY INVESTIGATION

B7-33 

F.2.d. Table of Flood Rates 

Depth of Center of Hole from Water Surface (feet) 

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 

Hole Diameter (inches)

 1 20 28 34 39 44 48 52 56 59 62 65 68 71 73 

 2 79 111 136 157 176 192 208 222 236 248 260 272 283 294

 3 177 250 306 353 395 433 468 500 530 559 586 612 637 661

 4 314 444 544 628 702 770 831 889 942 993 1042 1088 1133 1175

 5 491 694 850 982 1098 1202 1299 1388 1473 1552 1628 1700 1770 1837

 7 962 1361 1666 1924 2151 2357 2546 2721 2886 3042 3191 3333 3469 3600

 9 1590 2249 2755 3181 3556 3896 4208 4498 4771 5029 5275 5509 5734 5951

 11 2376 3360 4115 4752 5313 5820 6286 6720 7127 7513 7880 8230 8566 8890

 13 3318 4693 5747 6637 7420 8128 8779 9386 9955 10493 11006 11495 11964 12416

 14 3848 5443 6666 7697 8605 9427 10182 10885 11545 12170 12764 13331 13876 14400

 16 5027 7109 8706 10053 11240 12312 13299 14217 15080 15895 16671 17412 18123 18808

 17 5675 8025 9829 11349 12689 13900 15013 16050 17024 17944 18820 19657 20460 21232

 19 7088 10024 12277 14176 15850 17363 18754 20049 21265 22415 23509 24554 25557 26522

 20 7854 11107 13603 15708 17562 19238 20780 22214 23562 24836 26049 27207 28318 29387

 22 9503 13440 16460 19007 21250 23278 25143 26879 28510 30052 31519 32920 34265 35558

 23 10387 14689 17991 20774 23226 25443 27481 29379 31161 32846 34449 35981 37450 38864

 24 11310 15994 19589 22619 25289 27703 29923 31989 33929 35765 37510 39178 40778 42317

G. OCCUPATIONAL INJURY OR DEATH

G.1. GENERAL A qualified medical examiner or coroner usually determines the cause and manner of 

death. In general, deaths can result from wide variety of mechanisms. This section 

discusses these common causes of death; IOs should examine the sum total of 

evidence to assist or support (or not) the medical examiner or coroner’s findings. 

The Coast Guard will investigate for safety purposes injuries and deaths involving 

existing medical conditions (i.e., heart attack) only in so far as necessary to assure 

that no aspect of marine operations contributed to the casualty. 

G.3. SUICIDE, HOMICIDE, ASSAULT 

AND BATTERY

The Coast Guard will not investigate for safety purposes suicide, homicide, or assault 

and battery. Investigation of these incidents should be carried out as a matter of law 

enforcement, but not under the authorities granted by 46 USC 6301 et seq. This policy 

does not relieve the OCMI from the responsibility to conduct such preliminary 

investigation as is necessary to determine that the incident was, in fact, suicide, 

homicide, or assault and battery, and to refer the case for appropriate action. Such 

cases should be recorded as preliminary investigations. 

G.4. DIVING 

INCIDENT 

INVESTIGATIONS

Diving incident reporting is quite complex due to the complexity of the legislative 

authority relied upon to regulate the diving operation. In general, a diving death may 

 6 707 1000 1224 1414 1581 1731 1870 1999 2121 2235 2344 2449 2549 2645

 8 1257 1777 2177 2513 2810 3078 3325 3554 3770 3974 4168 4353 4531 4702

 10 1963 2777 3401 3927 4391 4810 5195 5554 5890 6209 6512 6802 7079 7347

 12 2827 3999 4897 5655 6322 6926 7481 7997 8482 8941 9378 9795 10194 10579

 15 4418 6248 7652 8836 9879 10822 11689 12496 13254 13971 14652 15304 15929 16530

 18 6362 8997 11019 12723 14225 15583 16832 17994 19085 20118 21099 22038 22938 23803

 21 8659 12246 14998 17318 19362 21210 22910 24491 25977 27382 28719 29996 31221 32399

 25 12272 17355 21255 24544 27441 30060 32468 34710 36816 38807 40701 42511 44247 45917

G.2. EXISTING 

MEDICAL CONDITIONS

G.4.a. Introduction 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 7: MARINE CASUALTY INVESTIGATION

B7-34 

be a marine casualty under 46 CFR 4.03-1 only when the death “involves” a vessel. 

The term “involving” is not precisely defined in regulation. 

G.4.b. Commercial Diving 

The regulations for commercial diving operations are located in 46 CFR 197. Diving, 

in general, requires specific equipment, procedures and techniques (SCUBA, surfacesupplied air, or mixed gas), referred to as the “diving mode.” The mode, however, 

should not be confused with the commercial or non-commercial nature of the dive. 

For the purposes of marine investigation, commercial diving is diving and related 

support operations conducted in connection with all types of work and employments, 

including general industry, construction, ship repairing, shipbuilding, shipbreaking and 

longshoring. It does not include: 

• Dives performed solely for instructional purposes, using open-circuit, 

compressed-air SCUBA and conducted within the no-decompression limits; 

• Dives performed solely for search, rescue, or related public safety purposes by 

or under the control of a governmental agency; or 

• Dives performed for scientific purposes (scientific diving) and which is under 

the direction and control of a scientific diving program. 

G.4.c. Non-Commercial Diving 

Diving conducted for any purpose other than those outlined in paragraph G.4.b. 

above shall be considered non-commercial. Recreational SCUBA dives, even when 

commenced from an inspected small passenger vessel and under the supervision of a 

dive master, are considered non-commercial diving. A ‘Part 4’ marine casualty 

investigation shall be conducted for recreational diving involving death or injury of 

persons diving for recreational purposes from a commercial vessel in federal waters. 

G.4.d. Diving Mode 

There are 3 basic diving modes: 

• SCUBA Diving - A diving mode independent of surface supply in which the 

diver uses open circuit self-contained underwater breathing apparatus. 

• Surface Supplied Air Diving - A diving mode in which the diver in the water is 

supplied from the surface dive location with compressed air for breathing. 

• Surface Supplied Mixed Gas Diving - A diving mode in which the diver in the 

water is supplied from the surface with a breathing gas other than air. 

G.4.e. Fact-Finding - General 

The IO should immediately determine if a diving accident is commercial or noncommercial and seek advice from expert resources (primarily, the U.S. Navy’s 

Experimental Dive Unit). All equipment associated with the dive operation shall be 

collected for possible analysis. All gauges should be checked and recorded. After 

retrieving SCUBA tanks and recording the gauge pressure, close the tank valve and 

simultaneously count the number of full revolutions it takes to fully close it. All 

policies and procedures shall also be collected. 

G.4.e.1. Resources 

The following resources should be considered when an IO desires expert opinion 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 7: MARINE CASUALTY INVESTIGATION

B7-35 

regarding a diving incident: 

• Commandant G-3RPC (202) 372-2047 

• Navy Experimental Diving Unit

Commanding Officer 

Navy Experimental Diving Unit 

321 Bullfinch Road 

Panama City, FL 32407-7015 

Attn: Code 03, Test & Evaluation 

Phone: 850-230-3100 or 850-235-4351 

• Coast Guard Liaison Office @ Navy Diving & Salvage Training Center: 

Coast Guard Liaison Officer 

Naval Diving & Salvage Training Center 

Panama City, FL 32407 

Phone: 850-235-5244 

• Professional Association of Diving Instructors (PADI)

• National Association of Underwater Instructors (NAUI) 

• International Association of Nitrox and Technical Divers (IANTD) 

• Technical Diving International (TDI) 

• Professional Scuba Assiciation (PSA) 

• Divers Alert Network (DAN) 

• American Nitrox Divers International (ANDI)

G.4.e.2. Divers Alert Network 

Divers Alert Network (DAN) is a non-profit medical and research organization 

dedicated to the safety and health of recreational scuba divers and associated with 

Duke University Medical Center. DAN operates a diving medical information line, 

conducts diving medical research, and develops and provides a number of educational 

programs for divers and medical professionals. Upon closure of the investigation, IOs 

may supply the ROI to DAN when requested. DAN can be contacted at: 

DAN America International Headquarters 1-919-684-8111 or 1-919-684-4DAN 

(collect) 

DAN Europe 41-1-1414 

DAN Japan 81-3-3812-4999 

http://www.diversalertnetwork.org/contact/email.asp

G.4.e.3. Some Suggested Questions 

The IO should seek to answer the following questions for commercial diving 

accidents: 

• Does 46 CFR 197.202 apply? If not, do OSHA rules (29 CFR 1910) apply? If 

so, contact the nearest OSHA office. 

350 S. Craig Rd 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 7: MARINE CASUALTY INVESTIGATION

B7-36 

• What weather and water conditions existed? In addition to routine factors, 

water temperature, current, and visibility at depth may be crucial. 

• What manual or table was used to direct the dive? 

• What type of diving operation was being conducted: 

 What diving mode was employed? 

 Wet or dry suits? 

 Heavyweight, lightweight, or other gear? 

 What were equipment details? 

 What other clothing was worn? 

• What specific type of work was being conducted: 

 construction,

 salvage, 

 inspection 

 on or near: 

9 pipelines, 

9 offshore rigs, 

9 vessels. 

• Was diving conducted from a shore facility, offshore platform, or vessel? 

• Who were the diving supervisor and person in charge? 

 Were they designated in writing? 

 If not, who was designated to perform these duties? 

 Did the persons acting in these capacities perform as required? 

• What was the makeup of the diving team? 

 Were the members of the dive team briefed by the supervisor? 

 What duties were assigned to each person? 

 What were their qualifications and prior experience? 

• What types of pressure vessels for human occupancy (PVHO's) were used and 

how were they configured? [NOTE: Simple diagrams and/or line drawings 

may be of value here.] 

• Was notice of the casualty made in accordance with 46 CFR 197.484, 197.486, 

and 197.488?

• Is there any pertinent information concerning prior diving, or the medical or 

working history of the deceased? 

• Is there information concerning treatment, if any was rendered? 

• Were there any waivers or variances applicable to the diving operation in 

question? If so, they must have been specific and in writing, with copies 

available at the dive site. 

9 platforms, 

 What were they doing prior to and during the casualty (see 46 CFR 

197.208, 197.210, 197.402, 197.404, 197.410, and 197.420)? 

• Were the PVHO's in compliance with 46 CFR 197.328, 197.330, 197.332, and 

197.462? Note date of construction, standards built to, and other nameplate 

data. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 7: MARINE CASUALTY INVESTIGATION

B7-37 

• Had the required periodic tests been conducted and logged (see 46 CFR 

197.450, 197.452, 197.454, 197.456, 197.458, 197.460, 197.462, 197.48O, and 

197.482)? 

• Did breathing gases meet the specifications of 46 CFR 197.340? 

• Did the breathing gas supply system meet the requirements of 46 CFR 

197.336, 197.338, and 197.340? 

G.4.e.4. SCUBA (see 46 CFR 197.430) 

• Within decompression limits? 

• Not deeper than 130 feet? 

• Standby diver and tenders on hand? 

G.4.e.5. Surface supplied air (see 46 CFR 197.432) 

• Not deeper than 190 feet or more than 30 minutes bottom time to 22 feet? 

• Primary and secondary breathing air supplies working properly? 

• For dives below 130 feet, had the decompression chamber been prepared for 

use at the dive site? 

• Bell or stage used where required? Specify type and how used. 

• Required equipment available? 

• Standby diver and tenders in dive team? 

• Details of decompression profile. Which table was used? 

• Bell or stage used where required? Type; give details and describe use. 

• Primary and secondary gas supplies working properly? 

• Required equipment available? 

• Standby diver and tenders on hand? 

• Required equipment available? 

G.4.e.6. Surface supplied mixed gas (see 46 CFR 

197.434) 

• Saturation dives meet requirements? 

• Details of decompression profile. Which table was used? 

G.4.3.7. Liveboat (see 46 CFR 197.436) 

• Was the operation conducted within the allowed parameters of environmental 

conditions? Details of vessel involved. 

• Was the dive no deeper than 220 feet? 

 On air? 

 Mixed gas? 

 What was the deepest depth if not all done at one depth? 

 What was the time at depth? 

• Was required equipment available? 

• Was a standby diver available? 

• Were means used to prevent the diver's hose from becoming entangled in the 

propellers of the vessel? 

• Were operations conducted under conditions for which a variance was 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 7: MARINE CASUALTY INVESTIGATION

B7-38 

required? 

• If a variance was issued, by which office, for which unit, and on what date? 

H. PERSONS MISSING AND PRESUMED DEAD

H.1 GENERAL Oftentimes when conducting an investigation under 46 USC 6301, a person’s status 

cannot be confirmed as their physical body (or remains) cannot be located. In many 

of these cases, upon the completion of the incident investigation and any subsequent 

search and rescue (SAR) action, the family (or someone else) needs an official 

document attesting to the missing person’s official status. Generally, the 

documentation required is a Death Certificate. However, a Coroner or Medical 

Examiner will not issue a Death Certificate without any positively identified remains. 

As a matter of policy, the U.S. Coast Guard does not issue Death Certificates. The 

U.S. Coast Guard may issue a Letter of Presumed Death. 

H.2 LETTER OF 

PRESUMED DEATH

A Letter of Presumed Death can be issued upon request upon the completion of the 

incident investigation. As a matter of policy, before a Letter of Presumed Death can 

be issued, the Search and Rescue Mission Coordinator (SMC), in whose AOR the 

person went missing, must be consulted to determine the search status, if any. See 

Figure B7-1.
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 7: MARINE CASUALTY INVESTIGATION

Figure B7-1 Letter of Presumed Death 

Commanding Officer 

United States Coast Guard 

Sector San Francisco Bay

Building 14, Coast Guard Island

Alameda, CA 94501-5100 

Phone: (510)437-3149 

FAX: (510)437-3072 

16732 

Date 

Name

Address 

Address 

Subj: LETTER OF PRESUMED DEATH 

Dear Name:

In accordance with Title 46, United States Code, Section 6301, the United States Coast Guard has 

conducted an investigation into the disappearance of (missing person) during a recreational sport fishing 

dive at (location), on or about July 11, 1999. (Missing person) was not found in the ensuing search and 

is presumed dead. 

The United States Coast Guard does not issue Death Certificates. A Coroner or Medical Examiner 

issues a Death Certificate after remains have been found or positively identified. Since no remains have 

been found, this letter documents the loss and presumptive death of (missing person) in lieu of a Death 

Certificate. 

The U.S. Coast Guard activity number and case number for the investigation into the disappearance of 

(missing person) are Activity #________ / Case #________. A copy of the investigation can be 

obtained by submitting a Freedom of Information Act Request to Commandant (G-SII), 2100 Second 

Street SW, Washington, D.C. 20593-0001. 

Sincerely, 

U. R. Nottobefound

Lieutenant Commander, U.S. Coast Guard 

Senior Investigating Officer 

By direction of the Commanding Officer 

B7-39 
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 
USCG Marine Safety Manual 

Volume V: Investigations and Enforcement

PART B: INVESTIGATION 

Chapter Eight: 

Pollution Incident 

Investigation
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 8: POLLUTION INCIDENT INVESTIGATION 

B8-i 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

A. GENERAL ................................... 1

A.1. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................................................1

A.2. ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS FOLLOWING INVESTIGATION ....................................................................................................1

A.3. RELATIONSHIP TO MARINE CASUALTY INVESTIGATION...................................................................................................2

B. DETERMINING LEVELS OF INVESTIGATIVE EFFORT FOR 

POLLUTION INCIDENTS ............................. 2

B.1. PURPOSE...........................................................................................................................................................................2

B.2. LEVELS OF INVESTIGATIVE EFFORT .................................................................................................................................2

B.3. CONDUCT OF INVESTIGATIONS AND DOCUMENTATION REQUIREMENTS ..........................................................................2

B.3.a. General.....................................................................................................................................................................2

B.3.b. Preliminary Investigations .......................................................................................................................................2

B.3.c. Data Collection Activities.........................................................................................................................................3

B.3.d. Informal and Formal Investigations.........................................................................................................................4

B.4. POLICY WITH REGARD TO REQUIRED ANALYSIS FOR POLLUTION INVESTIGATIONS.........................................................4

B.4.a. General.....................................................................................................................................................................4

B.4.b. Preliminary Level of Investigation ...........................................................................................................................4

B.4.c. Data Collection Level of Investigation .....................................................................................................................5

B.4.d. Informal and Formal Level of Investigation.............................................................................................................5

C. MARINE CASUALTIES INVOLVING POLLUTION INCIDENTS 

REPORTED TO THE INTERNATIONAL MARITIME ORGANIZATION 

(IMO)........................................ 5

C.1. GENERAL..........................................................................................................................................................................5

C.2. INFORMATION REQUIRED FOR INCIDENTS REPORTED TO THE IMO..................................................................................5

D. EVIDENCE NEEDED TO PROSECUTE A NOTICE OF VIOLATION 

CLASS I CIVIL PENALTY ........................... 6

D.1. PURPOSE ..........................................................................................................................................................................6

D.2. DEFINITIONS ....................................................................................................................................................................6

D.3. EVIDENCE FOR THE ‘FIVE ELEMENTS’..............................................................................................................................6

D.3.a. To Prosecute an NOV ..............................................................................................................................................6

D.3.b. To Prosecute a Class I Civil Penalty .......................................................................................................................7

D.4. HOW TO ESTABLISH THAT A POSSIBLE SOURCE IS THE VIOLATING VESSEL OR FACILITY WITH A KNOWN RESPONSIBLE 

PARTY ......................................................................................................................................................................................7

D.5. ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS / INFORMATION REGARDING EVIDENCE ............................................................................7

E. DETERMINING APPROPRIATE POLLUTION SAMPLING ACTION 8

E.1. PURPOSE...........................................................................................................................................................................8

E.2. WHEN TO TAKE SAMPLES.................................................................................................................................................8

E.3. WHERE TO TAKE SAMPLES...............................................................................................................................................9

E.4. HOW TO TAKE SAMPLES.................................................................................................................................................10

E.5. HAZMAT..........................................................................................................................................................................11
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 8: POLLUTION INCIDENT INVESTIGATION 

B8-ii 

F. NATURAL SOURCE DISCHARGE .................... 11

F.1. GENERAL........................................................................................................................................................................11

G. ASSESSING SHORELINE IMPACTS.................. 11

G.1. GENERAL .......................................................................................................................................................................11

G.2. BEACHES AND THE LITTORAL ZONE...............................................................................................................................12

G.3. AREAS OF THE LITTORAL ZONE .....................................................................................................................................12

G.3.a. General ..................................................................................................................................................................12

G.3.b. Description in terms of wave action.......................................................................................................................12

G.4. BREAKERS......................................................................................................................................................................13

G.5. BEACHES........................................................................................................................................................................13

G.5.a. Beach Profiles........................................................................................................................................................13

G.5.b. Beach Structure......................................................................................................................................................13

G.5.c. Rocky Shore Intertidal Zones.................................................................................................................................14

G.5.d. Rocky Cliffs and Bedrock Shores...........................................................................................................................14

G.5.e. Boulder Shores.......................................................................................................................................................14

G.5.f. Gravel Shores .........................................................................................................................................................15

G.5.g. Sandy and Mudflat Intertidal Zones.......................................................................................................................15

G.6. ESTUARY TYPES AND CIRCULATION PATTERNS.............................................................................................................15

G.6.a. Introduction............................................................................................................................................................15

G.6.b. Salt Wedge Estuaries .............................................................................................................................................16

G.6.c. Partially Mixed Estuaries.......................................................................................................................................16

G.6.d. Well-Mixed Estuaries.............................................................................................................................................17

G.6.e. Negative Circulation Estuaries..............................................................................................................................18
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 8: POLLUTION INCIDENT INVESTIGATION 

B8-1 

A.1.

INTRODUCTION

This chapter provides policy for pollution incident investigations. In general, the COTP 

or OCMI shall conduct pollution incident investigations to determine the causes not only 

of the pollution but also of the incident causing the pollution. Pollution incident 

investigations should not be conducted solely to determine civil or criminal liability. In 

general, all reported pollution incidents within Coast Guard jurisdiction, regardless of size, 

should be investigated. Pollution incident investigations should include an attempt to 

determine: 

• whether a discharge/release has in fact occurred or whether a potential 

discharge/release is likely to occur; 

• whether the Coast Guard has jurisdiction over that discharge/release; 

• the source of the discharge/release and the potentially responsible party; and 

• whether the discharge/release is a violation of law or regulation.

A.2. ENFORCEMENT 

ACTIONS FOLLOWING 

INVESTIGATION

Most Coast Guard investigations are pursued under multiple law enforcement 

authorities. Accordingly, investigations are not administrative, civil, or criminal; they 

are fact-finding activities. However, upon completion of an investigation, the 

OCMI/COTP/FOSC will decide whether or not sufficient proof of a violation has 

been identified and documented to proceed with enforcement action(s) and, if so, the 

appropriate type of enforcement action(s) to be undertaken, which may include 

criminal, civil, administrative, or any combination of the three. Proof of a violation 

of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (FWPCA) is considered sufficient only 

when all five elements defining a violation have been identified and documented. 

These elements are: 

1. a discharge of oil or a hazardous substance; 

2. from a known source (vessel, facility, etc.); 

3. with a known Responsible Party (i.e. owner, operator, person-in-charge); 

4. into or upon the navigable waters of the United States; and 

5. creating a sheen, sludge, film, or emulsion or meeting the Reportable 

Quantity (RQ) requirements of 40 CFR 117. 

A. GENERAL

Every incident reported and subsequent investigation shall be properly entered in 

MISLE. Doing so documents the incident and allows for appropriate tracking and 

measurement of prevention and enforcement activity which is critical to program 

evaluation. 

When all five elements of a violation have been identified, appropriate enforcement 

action shall be taken. During the course of the investigation, other deficiencies or 

violations (e.g. missing or inoperable pollution prevention equipment) may also be 

identified. Sufficient identification and documentation of the jurisdictional and 

factual elements for these deficiencies and violations should be completed before any 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 8: POLLUTION INCIDENT INVESTIGATION 

B8-2 

A.3.

RELATIONSHIP TO 

MARINE CASUALTY 

INVESTIGATION

B.1. PURPOSE

B.2. LEVELS OF 

INVESTIGATIVE 

EFFORT

In 1995, the Quality Action Team on Marine Safety Investigations suggested that 

three levels of investigation exist. This section defines and implements the levels of 

investigation for pollution incidents: 

• Preliminary Investigations are initial investigative efforts undertaken to 

ascertain whether a report is genuine, how severe the incident is or will 

become, whether the Coast Guard has jurisdiction, whether other agencies or

offices must be notified, and what level of Coast Guard investigative effort is 

necessary. 

• Data Collection Activities do not require any significant investigative effort, 

and usually consist only of collecting and entering basic factual information 

into MISLE for future reference and analysis and, when applicable, referral 

for enforcement action(s).

B.3. CONDUCT OF 

INVESTIGATIONS AND 

DOCUMENTATION 

REQUIREMENTS

B.3.a. General 

The following guidance provides instructions and criteria for conducting and 

documenting the various levels of pollution incident investigations based on the 

definitions provided in Section B.2. 

B.3.b. Preliminary Investigations 

All notifications/reports of pollution incidents (i.e. discharges or releases as defined 

in 40 CFR 300.5) shall be documented in MISLE Notification records except for: 

enforcement action is considered. 

Where a pollution incident results from, contributes to, or qualifies as a reportable 

marine casualty as defined in 46 CFR 4.05-1, the pollution and casualty investigations 

shall be conducted and documented as a single investigation in MISLE. In that the 

majority of pollution incidents include both investigative and response activities, both 

the incident and the incident management will be conducted and documented in 

MISLE. Marine casualty and pollution investigators should arrange a division of 

responsibilities early in the investigation to avoid duplication of effort and 

expeditiously complete the investigation. 

B. DETERMINING LEVELS OF INVESTIGATIVE EFFORT FOR 

POLLUTION INCIDENTS

This section provides guidance for the investigation, reporting, and record keeping 

processes associated with pollution incident investigations 

• Informal Investigations and Formal Investigations are more exhaustive 

investigative efforts and are not generally required, unless the pollution 

incident is a part of a marine casualty as defined in 46 CFR, Part 4. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 8: POLLUTION INCIDENT INVESTIGATION 

B8-3 

• notifications from the National Response Center (NRC) in which it is 

obvious the Coast Guard has no investigative or response jurisdiction, and 

• notifications relayed from other Coast Guard units (as they should already 

exist in MISLE). 

No data entry beyond the MISLE Notification is required if the preliminary 

investigation reveals that:

1. the incident is a mystery spill and the Coast Guard takes no action (response, 

investigation, or otherwise); 

2. the incident is outside of the Coast Guard’s investigative jurisdiction; 

3. the incident can not be verified or is proven erroneous; 

4. the incident does not meet the Reportable Quantity (RQ) criteria of 40 CFR 

117.3 or 40 CFR 302.4; or 

5. the incident is a National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) 

authorized discharge or release. 

In these cases, units shall enter the following minimum information in the 

Notification record: 

• Incident detail/location tab: the incident type, notification method, incident 

date/time, notification date/time, and the incident location; 

• Reporting Party tab: the name and phone number of the reporting party; 

• Involved Subjects tab: the waterway entered as a referential involved subject; 

and 

• Incident Description tab: brief description of the incident and one of the five 

reasons above that no investigation beyond a preliminary investigation was 

conducted. 

B.3.c. Data Collection Activities 

 A data collection activity shall be conducted and documented for any reported 

pollution incident where the preliminary investigation indicates that: 

• the five elements of a Federal Water Pollution Control Act (FWPCA) 

violation detailed in enclosure (1) are identified; or 

• the source of the discharge or release is unknown (mystery) but the Coast 

Guard will take some action (i.e. response). 

If the preliminary investigation reveals something other than the five situations 

described above, the unit should undertake the appropriate level of investigative 

effort to complete the investigation and continue documentation in MISLE from the 

MISLE Notification through to the Incident Investigation Activity and Enforcement 

Activity, as appropriate. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 8: POLLUTION INCIDENT INVESTIGATION 

B8-4 

Documentation of a data collection level investigation of a pollution incident shall 

include: 

• A MISLE notification; 

• An incident investigation activity (IIA) with: 

 if known, the source vessel or facility entered (or mapped in from 

the case) as a referential involved subject (“other” involved subjects 

in MISLE are entered non-referentially); 

 if known, the responsible party entered (or mapped in from the 

case) as a referential involved party; 

 the waterway segment in which the discharge occurred entered (or 

mapped in from the case) as a referential involved waterway; 

 if the source is known, a Damage to the Environment event timeline 

entry with a Discharge Details filed; 

 if the source is unknown (mystery) and the Coast Guard takes some 

action, a Marine Environment condition timeline entry with Mystery 

Details filed; 

 a Marine Environment condition timeline entry with a Condition 

Type of “Waterway Condition” and Environmental Damage Details 

filed; 

 a Marine Environment condition timeline entry with a Condition 

Type of “Marine Environment” and Marine Environment Details 

filed; and 

B.3.d. Informal and Formal Investigations 

For some large-scale vessel-source pollution incidents, the pollution investigation 

coincides with a marine casualty investigation. When a single incident spawns 

multiple investigations, they will all be captured in the same MISLE Case and incident 

B.4. POLICY WITH 

REGARD TO REQUIRED 

ANALYSIS FOR 

POLLUTION 

INVESTIGATIONS

B.4.a. General 

B.4.b. Preliminary Level of Investigation 

 the evidence that was collected to prove or attempt to prove the five 

elements of a violation. 

management/investigation activities (e.g. the casualty investigation of a vessel 

grounding and the pollution investigation of the resulting discharge of fuel oil will be 

documented in the same incident investigation activity). 

This section details policy with regard to the minimum parts of the marine 

investigation process (Chapter B1 through B6) to be used for pollution investigations 

for all levels of investigative effort. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 8: POLLUTION INCIDENT INVESTIGATION 

B8-5 

B.4.c. Data Collection Level of Investigation 

B.4.d. Informal and Formal Level of Investigation 

C.1. GENERAL

C.2. INFORMATION 

REQUIRED FOR 

INCIDENTS REPORTED 

TO THE IMO 

Pollution resulting from an incident 

• Type of pollutant. 

• UN number/IMO hazard class (if applicable). 

• Type of packaging (if applicable). 

• Quantity on board. 

• Quantity lost. 

• Method of stowage and securing. 

• Where stowed and quantities in each compartment/container. 

• Tanks/spaces breached. 

• Tanks/spaces liable to be breached. 

• Action taken to prevent further loss. 

• Action taken to mitigate pollution. 

• Dispersant/neutralizer used, if any. 

Pollution investigations that only reach the preliminary level of investigation require 

none of the marine investigation process be completed beyond adequate fact-finding 

to determine that no further Coast Guard effort is required. 

Pollution investigations that reach the data collection level of investigation require the 

generating of a timeline with only enough information to meet the minimum data 

entry requirements for MISLE as detailed in the MISLE Process Guides. 

Pollution investigations do not generally reach the informal or formal level of 

investigation without being involved in a marine casualty. These investigations will 

follow the policy set forth in Section B.2. of Chapter B7 of this Volume. 

C. MARINE CASUALTIES INVOLVING POLLUTION INCIDENTS 

REPORTED TO THE INTERNATIONAL MARITIME ORGANIZATION (IMO)

When such information can reasonably be obtained, the following information (in 

addition to the information required in Chapter B7 of this Volume) must be

contained in a the ROI which will be forwarded by CG-545 to the IMO: 

• Restricting boom used, if any. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 8: POLLUTION INCIDENT INVESTIGATION 

B8-6 

D.1. PURPOSE

D.2. DEFINITIONS The following definitions are applicable to evidence required for civil penalty 

prosecution: 

• Direct evidence is that evidence which in itself (without need for inferences 

or reasoning) proves the source of the discharge or shows the path of the 

discharge, such as a witness statement about the discharge, or pictures and 

video showing the path from the source to the water. 

• Circumstantial evidence is that evidence which does not in itself prove the 

source of the discharge or show the path, but which does show an 

association, such as when a given vessel carries black oil and the slick was 

black oil, or where slick samples match a suspected source. 

D.3. EVIDENCE 

FOR THE ‘FIVE 

ELEMENTS’ 

D.3.a. To Prosecute an NOV 

‘Five Elements’ Minimum Evidence

A discharge of oil or a hazardous 

substance 

PI Statement 

From a known source (vessel, facility, 

etc.) 

PI Statement; MISLE Referential Vessel 

or Facility 

With a known Responsible Party (i.e. 

owner, operator, person-in-charge) 

PI Statement; MISLE Referential Party 

Into or upon the navigable waters of the 

United States 

PI Statement 

creating a sheen, sludge, film, or 

emulsion or meeting the RQ 

PI Statement 

D. EVIDENCE NEEDED TO PROSECUTE A NOTICE OF VIOLATION 

CLASS I CIVIL PENALTY

This section provides guidance regarding the minimum amount of evidence generally 

necessary to successfully prosecute a Notice of Violation (NOV) and/or a Class I 

Civil Penalty following a pollution investigation in accordance with reference 33 CFR 

1.07. 

• Possible source means any vessel, facility, etc., carrying/storing the same 

type of oil as the slick, and located in such a place as to have feasibly caused

the slick. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 8: POLLUTION INCIDENT INVESTIGATION 

B8-7 

D.3.b. To Prosecute a Class I Civil Penalty 

‘Five Elements’ Minimum Evidence

A discharge of oil or a hazardous 

substance 

PI Statement; digital photos are 

suggested but not required 

From a known source (vessel, facility, 

etc.) 

PI Statement; MISLE Referential Vessel 

or Facility; digital photos are suggested 

but not required 

With a known Responsible Party (i.e. 

owner, operator, person-in-charge) 

PI Statement; MISLE Referential Party 

Into or upon the navigable waters of the 

United States 

PI Statement; a scanned chart or GIS 

image showing the discharge location 

creating a sheen, sludge, film, or 

emulsion or meeting the RQ 

PI Statement; digital photos are 

suggested but not required 

D.4. HOW TO 

ESTABLISH THAT A 

POSSIBLE SOURCE IS 

THE VIOLATING 

VESSEL OR FACILITY 

WITH A KNOWN 

RESPONSIBLE PARTY

To properly establish that a ‘possible source’ is the violating “vessel or facility with a 

known RP,” one of the following sets of criteria must be met: 

• Optimal Direct Evidence Case

1. The path of the RP’s source oil to the water, and 

2. The RP admits to being the source, or

3. Pictures and/or video showing the path from the source to the water, or

4. The PI witnesses the discharge. 

• Minimal Direct Evidence Case

1. The path of the RP’s source oil to the water, and 

2. A witness to the discharge stating the source. 

• Circumstantial Evidence Case

1. The path of the RP’s source oil to the water, and 

2. A conclusive match between the slick and the RP’s source oil.

 OR 

1. A conclusive match between the slick and the RP’s source oil; and 

D.5. ADDITIONAL 

REQUIREMENTS /

INFORMATION 

REGARDING EVIDENCE

The following requirements / information provide additional detail regarding the 

previously mentioned evidence: 

• The PI must verify the RP’s primary address (the best address to use by the 

CGHO for correspondence) prior to initiating any enforcement action. 

2. Conclusive non-matches between all other possible sources and the slick. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 8: POLLUTION INCIDENT INVESTIGATION 

B8-8 

• The ‘path’ must be described in the PI statement or have a marked vessel or 

facility plan scanned showing the path. 

• When an RP admits to a discharge, it must be included in a witness statement. 

• When a PI witnesses a discharge, it must be included in the PI statement. 

• When a witness observes a discharge, it must be included in a witness statement. 

• When there is a conclusive match or non-match, the MSL report must be 

included. 

• When there is a conclusive match, samples should be collected at multiple points 

throughout the path, when able. 

• When there are conclusive non-matches with other possible sources, the process 

of identifying other possible sources must be described in the PI statement. 

E.1. PURPOSE

E.2. WHEN TO 

TAKE SAMPLES

The following information describes when a PI should conduct pollution sampling: 

• Environmental Crimes: Sampling shall be conducted when there is credible 

evidence of an environmental crime. PIs must be familiar with the elements 

of the various environmental crimes as described in COMDTINST 

M16201.1; Criminal Enforcement of Environmental Laws and COMDTINST 

M16247.1 (series); Maritime Law Enforcement Manual, Chapter 9; and 

Chapter C8 of this Volume. 

• Significant Spill Volume Cases: Sampling of the source (tanks, piping, etc.) 

as well as various locations where the spill may have traveled/impacted 

should be conducted on spills where extensive clean up operations are 

expected, even when the PI has strong direct evidence of the source of the 

discharge. This is important for determining if spill samples collected after 

the original spill samples are derived from the same source. 

• Optimal Direct Evidence Cases: Sampling is not generally necessary when

the PI has strong direct evidence of the source of the discharge. 

• When no other possible sources are identified, it should be described in the PI 

statement. 

E. DETERMINING APPROPRIATE POLLUTION SAMPLING ACTION

This section provides guidance for PIs regarding pollution sampling during the 

course of any investigation involving pollution. In general, the OCMI/COTP may 

elect not to sample in any instance where he or she has determined that enforcement 

action is unnecessary. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 8: POLLUTION INCIDENT INVESTIGATION 

B8-9 

• Minimal Direct Evidence Cases: Sampling is advisable when the PI has 

direct evidence of the discharge, but that evidence is minimal. Weak direct 

evidence includes a single witness statement reporting the source or two 

pieces of evidence that seem to contradict one another as to the source, such 

as a photograph and contradicting witness testimony. 

E.3. WHERE TO 

TAKE SAMPLES

The following information describes where a PI should conduct pollution sampling: 

• Smaller Vessels: Smaller vessels typically discharge through a simple bilge 

suction and overboard discharge system. Small vessels with 

compartmentation, however, may have multiple pumps and overboard 

discharges. When sampling a smaller vessel, it is important to sample each 

independently discharging bilge space where oil or oily water is found. 

Samples of fuel may also be taken. In all instances, PIs should consider the 

type of oil discharged when determining sampling locations. 

• Deep Draft Vessels: Many oil spills from deep-draft vessels originate from 

marine casualties. This includes groundings where there is abundant direct 

evidence of the discharge. This evidence includes photographs of ruptured 

shell plating, cargo or bunker tank soundings, photographs of the emerging 

slick, videotape and the like. When sampling a deep draft vessel consider the 

following: 

 Bilge Systems: When deep draft vessel oil spills are not the result of a 

casualty, Coast Guard investigations have generally implicated the oily 

water separator (OWS) / bilge discharge system. Accordingly, PIs should 

focus their attention on the engineroom bilge system in deciding where to 

take samples. Typically, deep draft vessels draw suction from the bilge 

but store the oily water mixture in slop / sludge tanks. Using the OWS, 

separated oil is stored in slop / sludge / waste oil tanks where it is 

pumped ashore or burned aboard ship. This general set up will require a 

PI to consider sampling: 

 “Clean” water from outboard of the OWS (where available); 

 Oily water from inboard of the OWS; 

 Oily water from each segregated bilge area; and 

 Oily water or concentrated oils from each slop / sludge / waste oil 

• Circumstantial Evidence Cases: Sampling shall be conducted when the PI 

has no direct evidence of the source of the discharge. In such cases, the RP is 

typically identified through the possible route of oil and oil sample analysis 

matches. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 8: POLLUTION INCIDENT INVESTIGATION 

B8-10 

tank. 

 Ballast Systems: Although relatively rare, some vessels are fitted with 

ballast piping arrangements that could allow ballast in fuel or cargo oil 

tanks, or that could allow oily water in ballast tanks. PIs must consider 

the specific bilge / ballast segregation arrangements aboard the ship, copy 

and review ballast records, and determine whether water / oily water 

samples should be taken from the ballast tanks. Where segregation is not 

completely independent, the PI should consider sampling: 

 “Clean” water from outboard of the discharge monitor (where 

available); 

 Oily water from inboard of the discharge monitor; 

 Water/oily water from each ballast tank; and 

 Oily water / slop / sludge from each involved cargo tank. 

 Cargo Systems: Cargo system spills usually occur during transfers, but 

can occur at other times (particularly following internal tank-to-tank cargo 

transfers). Such spills also have resulted from “over the top” transfers 

which are prohibited. Where cargo is suspected, each cargo tank should 

be independently sampled. 

E.4. HOW TO TAKE 

SAMPLES

Oil samples taken during a pollution investigation shall be taken in accordance with 

the MSL Oil Spill Sample Handling and Transmittal Guide, and a proper chain of 

custody shall be maintained. Coast Guard field units shall not maintain duplicate (or 

‘back up’) oil samples. All oil samples that are collected by Coast Guard field units 

for analysis shall be sent to the MSL as soon as possible following their collection. 

The longer an oil sample is maintained at a Coast Guard field unit prior to sending it 

to the MSL, the less likely the possibility will be of determining a sample match. 

Duplicate oil samples maintained by Coast Guard field units that are analyzed after 

the original sample may overturn a previously determined sample match. 

• “The Spill:” In general, especially for larger spills, sampling towards the midpoint (if possible) and at the leading edges of a spill is advised as it shows 

weathering trends. Also, additional sampling of impacted areas can be useful 

to determine if the oil is from the original responsible party or if the spill has 

become a “spill of opportunity.” 

Confirmation Samples: In some instances, it may be necessary to take a second 

sample from a suspect source for separate analysis by a state or other agency should 

the original sample be found to match a slick. Confirmation samples are never for 

Coast Guard purposes and shall not be stored or maintained by Coast Guard field 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 8: POLLUTION INCIDENT INVESTIGATION 

B8-11 

E.5. HAZMAT

F.1. GENERAL

G.1. GENERAL One important function of an investigation of pollution discharge during a response 

is to provide the Federal On-Scene Coordinator with information about the areas 

impacted by a spill. This also serves other investigation purposes in that it helps to 

establish that the spill occurred on or impacted a navigable waterway of the United 

States and documents the extent of the spill impacts. Shoreline assessment is an 

activity taken under the National Contingency Plan evaluating damage caused by the 

spill to economic and environmental resources. As such, shoreline assessment should 

properly be executed in conjunction with the natural resource trustees’ damage 

assessment activities (see 40 CFR 300.615(c)(3)(I) and (d)(4)). Natural Resource 

Trustees such as the Department of the Interior and the National Marine Fisheries 

Service possess biological, geophysical, and toxicological expertise that PIs will not 

routinely have. Accordingly, PIs should limit their input to shoreline assessment to: 

• a thorough physical description of the waterway affected; 

• descriptions of the specific areas affected by a discharge, including the exact 

location, thickness of oil, etc.; 

• a tabulation (raw count) of any directly affected economic and/or 

environmental resources (wildlife) affected by the discharge with no 

units. Before taking confirmation samples, the PI should have a clear reason for 

doing so, such as a request by state investigators to perform confirmation tests using 

a state laboratory. MSL can provide portions of the original samples to requesting 

parties, if authorized by the PI. 

Currently, only properly qualified response personnel from the Coast Guard National 

Strike Force may take hazardous materials samples. All other Coast Guard personnel 

are prohibited from taking such samples. If another agency takes hazardous materials 

samples for analysis, obtain a copy of their report. For informational purposes, the 

FBI, EPA, or other state, local, (possibly commercial) laboratories will have to 

conduct the analysis. The Marine Safety Laboratory (MSL) does not analyze anything 

other than oil. 

F. NATURAL SOURCE DISCHARGE

Natural source discharges are generally investigated to ensure that the discharge does, 

in fact, generate from a natural source. These natural sources are usually large veins 

of oil located beneath the ocean floor. Due to the shifting of plates (underwater 

earthquakes) or pressure build up, they occasionally discharge varying quantities of 

crude oil (or other substances). If there is any question as to whether the source is a 

natural source, treat the pollution incident investigation as if it were an unknown 

source discharge. 

G. ASSESSING SHORELINE IMPACTS
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 8: POLLUTION INCIDENT INVESTIGATION 

qualitative estimate of the degree of damage caused by that impact;

• Nature of the spill, estimate the amount, type and time until shoreline impact;

• Weather: present conditions and area forecasts;

• Water movements, including currents, tides and wave actions;

• Shoreline contour including depth, gradient, etc.; and

G.2. BEACHES AND 

THE LITTORAL ZONE

• Accessibility of the affected site by land, water and air. 

While people often associate the area affected by oil and hazmat spills as just the 

beach, the much broader area known as the littoral zone must be assessed for effects. 

The littoral zone extends from the point where land plants end (and beach or

shoreline plants begin) to the region below the water where sediment is not disturbed 

by wave action during fair weather conditions, usually the point where the water 

reaches a depth of about 10 to 20 meters at low tide. PIs should be familiar with the 

make up and terminology for the littoral zones both to accurately describe the areas 

affected by a discharge and to assist the Federal On- Scene Coordinator in 

prioritizing areas for protection and removal.

G.3. AREAS OF 

THE LITTORAL ZONE

G.3.a. General 

The littoral zone can be divided into three principle areas: 

• the foreshore or intertidal zone, that area which is exposed at low tide but 

covered at high tide; 

• the backshore, that area above mean high tide and influenced by the sea only 

through storm waves or exceptionally high tides; and 

• the shoreface, that area of the Littoral Zone which is permanently covered 

by water except during exceptionally low tides. 

G.3.b. Description in terms of wave action 

The Littoral Zone can also be divided into three zones based on wave action when 

such descriptions are more relevant or easily determined. The three wave action 

zones are: 

• the breaker zone, where waves become unstable and break; 

• the surf zone, where waves from the breaker zone become shallower waves 

called bores and reach up the beach face to the swash zone; and

• the swash zone, that beach area which is alternately covered by the upsurge 

of water (the swash) and exposed as the backwash retreats. 

F o r e s h o r e

I n t e r t i d a l Z o n e

B a c k S h o r e

B8-12 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 8: POLLUTION INCIDENT INVESTIGATION 

G.4. BREAKERS Generally speaking, small gentle waves and swells tend to build a beach up though 

sediment movement, whereas storm waves and breakers tend to tear them down. 

Breaking waves are very geophysically complex. Breaking waves are caused when 

large waves from offshore move into shallow water environments where their 

forward motion is limited by the depth of water. Unable to move forward, they build 

up. The result of the increased wave height will depend on the slope of the 

underlying beach, i.e., its profile. There are four basic types of breakers: 

• The spilling breaker, characterized by foam and turbulence at the wave 

crest. The spilling starts some distance offshore and occurs because a layer of 

water at the crews moves forward faster than the wave. Foam eventually 

covers the leading face of the wave. These waves are associated with a gently

sloping beach profile. 

• The collapsing breaker is similar to a plunging breaker except that instead 

of curling over, its leading face collapses. This occurs because the beach 

• profile is steeper than those creating a plunging breaker, or because local wind 

conditions are relatively strong. 

• The surging breaker is found on the steepest beaches and are formed by 

long, low frequency waves. The front faces and crests of these waves 

generally remain unbroken as the wave slides up the beach. Where beach 

faces become vertical (i.e., cliff faces), surging breakers may generate 

significant pounding and spray as the wave finally collapses during its 

backwash. 

G.5. BEACHES G.5.a. Beach Profiles 

The sedimentary profile of the littoral zone is not a smooth landward slope; instead it 

is usually characterized by a series of ridges or sediment bars. The berm of the 

backshore zone is a flat-topped ridge that develops at the limit of the wave swash on 

steeply sloping beaches. The area below the berm is generally referred to as the 

beach face. Shallow sloping beaches tend to develop longshore depressions, often 

filled with water, called runnels. The bar on the other side of a runnel is often called 

a swash bar. Beneath the breaker zone a longshore bar may form, particularly 

during the winter when berms are often absent on some beaches. 

G.5.b. Beach Structure 

When a wave surges up the beach, the swash carries some sediment ashore, while the 

backwash takes some sediment seaward. These processes continue to build up or 

erode a beach until they come into balance, canceling each other out. The point at 

which they come into balance determines beach steepness, which in turn depends on 

• The plunging breaker is the classic surfer’s wave with a convex back and 

concave front. The breaker curls over and plunges downward with 

considerable force. Plunging breakers generally form on gently sloping 

beaches but are associated with long swells from distant storms rather than 

the short waves of local storms more likely to produce spilling breakers. 

Spilling Breaker

Gentle Slope, Local 

Storm Waves 

Plunging 

Breaker

Gentle Slope, Distant 

Storm Waves 

Surging Breaker

Steep Slope, Long 

Low Waves 

Collapsing 

Breaker

Steep Slope, Long 

Low Waves 

B8-13 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 8: POLLUTION INCIDENT INVESTIGATION 

B8-14 

the size of the particles in the sediment. On beaches with large particles, water 

quickly percolates down through the beach sediment and very little material is washed 

seaward with the backwash. This creates a beach with a steep profile. When a beach 

has smaller sediment particles, the beach is more waterlogged and the backwash will 

be greater. Thus, beaches with smaller particles are generally flatter in profile. The 

degree to which the shoreline experiences violent waves and tidal swings (exposure), 

however, is also a factor. Using all of these factors, beaches can generally be 

categorized as being reflective or dissipative. Reflective beaches are characterized by 

coarse sands, small waves, steep slopes, small tidal ranges, short wave periods, harsh 

swash conditions, and relatively impoverished fauna. Dissipative beaches, however, 

generally have fine sand, large waves, shallow slopes, high tidal ranges, long wave 

periods, harmless swash conditions, and rich fauna. 

G.5.c. Rocky Shore Intertidal Zones 

Ecologists have intensely studied zonation on various beaches since the late 1940s. 

Generally speaking, the intertidal zone can be thought of as being composed of three 

major zones:

• a broad middle shore zone called the eulittoral zone characterized by 

suspension-feeding barnacles, mussels, or sometimes oysters; and 

• a narrow low-shore zone called the sublittoral fringe located below the low 

tide line but still influenced by tides and waves characterized by red algae, 

large kelps and sea squirts. 

(Raffaelli and Hawkins, Intertidal Ecology, 1996). 

G.5.d. Rocky Cliffs and Bedrock Shores 

The most exposed rocky shores are rocky cliffs and bedrock shores. On these shores 

the littoral fringe typically has small snails, bluegreen algae, and encrusting lichens. 

The black stripe of bluegreen algae is very common and quite distinctive. The 

eulittoral zone is dominated by encrusting suspension feeders such as mussels and 

barnicles. Seaweeds in the eulittoral zone tend to form short turf. The sublittral zone 

along the colder, nutrient rich shores typically contains large kelp and algal turfs, such 

as the species-rich kelp forests of the southwestern pacific. (Raffaelli and Hawkins, 

Intertidal Ecology, 1996).

G.5.e. Boulder Shores 

Boulder shores have many of these same distributional patterns, but have added 

biological richness provided by the many overhang and crevice micro-habitats. The 

large spaces between boulders provide an excellent habitat for crabs and gastropods. 

These beaches are often mixtures of particle sizes with boulders mixed with finer 

grained gravels, sands, or even held together by mussel byssus threads (as on the 

Atlantic coasts). 

• a high shore area sometimes called the littoral fringe characterized by 

encrusting lichen, bluegreen bacteria, small snails and periwinkles; 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 8: POLLUTION INCIDENT INVESTIGATION 

B8-15 

(Raffaelli and Hawkins, Intertidal Ecology, 1996). 

G.5.f. Gravel Shores 

Gravel shores also have the general rocky shore distributional pattern, though not in 

the abundance of living things found on rocky cliff, bedrock, or boulder shores. 

Often, gravel beaches are considered barren because they offer little protection from 

exposure and but the particle sizes are too large to retain swash water. 

(Raffaelli and Hawkins, Intertidal Ecology, 1996). 

G.5.g. Sandy and Mudflat Intertidal Zones 

Ecologists have destructively examined sandy beaches and mudflats (because most 

organisms live beneath the surface) since the early 1950s. While several systems have 

been proposed for describing the ecological zones within the intertidal zone, no 

single framework has emerged as the universally accepted standard. One system 

divides the beach into four zones: 

• the dry sand zone; 

• the water retention zone which is farther downshore and is damp but not 

wet at low tide; 

• the area of resurgence which is further still downshore and in which interparticle water flows in and out of the sediment with the tide; and 

• the permanently saturated zone in which there is little exchange of water 

over the tidal cycle. 

• While having the benefit of being readily identified visually, this system 

provides little information about the flora of the various zones. An alternate 

zone system suggests that there are three zones: 

• one high zone in which only air breathing animals exist; 

• a middle zone. 

In general it can be said that the specific distribution of life along a fine-particle 

intertidal shore depends on the exposure of the shore, the size of the particles, and 

the stability of the sediments. 

(Raffaelli and Hawkins, Intertidal Ecology, 1996). 

• low zone in which only truly aquatic animals exist; and 

G.6. ESTUARY 

TYPES AND 

CIRCULATION 

PATTERNS

G.6.a. Introduction 

The word “estuary” comes from the Latin word aestus, meaning tide and the adjective 

aestuarium, meaning tidal. Intuitively, an estuary is the area where fresh water meets 

salt water at an inlet of the sea. R.W. Fairbridge (1980) gives a much more rigorous 

definition, however: “An estuary is an inlet of the sea reaching into a river valley as 

far as the upper limit of tidal rise, usually being divisible into three sectors: (a) a 

marine or lower estuary, in free connection with the open sea; (b) a middle estuary, 

subject to strong salt and freshwater mixing; and (c) an upper of fluvial estuary 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 8: POLLUTION INCIDENT INVESTIGATION 

characterized by freshwater but subject to daily tidal action.” PIs performing 

shoreline assessments or slick reconnaissance should be aware of the specific type 

and part of the estuary they are surveying because these factors control the 

circulation, and thus the flushing of the discharge, in the estuary. Estuaries are not 

uniform in characters, but the differences owe primarily to variations in tidal range 

and river discharge volumes and rates. There are four general types of estuaries: 

Negative Circulation Estuaries, Well-Mixed Estuaries, Partially Mixed Estuaries, and 

Salt Wedge Estuaries. 

SALT WEDGE 

ESTUARI ES: 

LARGE RIVER 

D I SCHARGE, 

SMALL TIDAL 

INFLUENCE 

G.6.b. Salt Wedge Estuaries 

Salt Wedge Estuaries develop when a river discharges into a virtually tideless sea. 

The less dense fresh river water spreads out over the surface of the denser saltwater. 

Because there is virtually no movement due to tide, the salt and fresh waters do not 

mix quickly, allowing a salt water “wedge” to develop in the river. The position of 

the salt wedge will vary depending on the river flow. When the flow is low, the salt 

wedge moves farther upriver; when the flow is high, the salt wedge moves farther 

seaward. Rivers with high sediment discharges in salt wedge estuaries (like the 

Mississippi River) tend to form deltas. The relatively strong separation of salt water 

and fresh water produces a weak landward current in the lower salt water layer, and a 

strong seaward current (dependent on the river current only) in the upper fresh water 

layer. 

PARTIAL LY 

MIXED 

ESTUARI ES: 

LARGE RIVER 

D I SCHARGE, 

MODERATE 

TIDAL 

INFLUENCE 

G.6.c. Partially Mixed Estuaries 

Partially Mixed Estuaries develop where rivers discharge into the sea with a moderate 

tidal range. In these estuaries tidal currents are significant, so the whole salt water 

mass moves up and down the estuary with the tides. The stresses between the salt 

and fresh water layers mix saltwater upward and freshwater downward, making the 

boundary between the layers much less well defined. Because a large volume of salt 

water mixes with the fresh water, the landward flow in the lower salt water layer is 

much larger than in a Salt Wedge Estuary. At some point near the head of the 

estuary there will be a point at which the water is not moving in the lower level as 

fresh water outflow and sea water inflow collide and cancel. This point is called the 

null point, and its position varies with spring-neap tide cycle and with the seasons. 

The null point has important consequences for sediment transport, and for the 

B8-16 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 8: POLLUTION INCIDENT INVESTIGATION 

movement of discharged materials with high specific gravities. The James River in 

Virginia is an example of a Partially Mixed Estuary. 

WELL-MIXED 

ESTUARI ES: 

BROAD A N D 

SHALLOW, 

TIDAL 

INFLUENCE 

EQUI VALENT TO 

RIVER 

D I SCHARGE 

G.6.d. Well-Mixed Estuaries 

Well-Mixed Estuaries develop where the estuary is broad and shallow, and where tidal 

currents are relatively strong compared to the river flow. In this situation the water 

column becomes completely mixed such that there are almost no discernable salt 

water and fresh water layers. These estuaries are usually shallow and funnel shaped, 

allowing the Coriolis “force” to swing incoming tidal currents and seaward flowing 

river currents to the right relative to its motion (in the northern hemisphere). In 

other words, if one were looking seaward from the head of the estuary, the up-estuary 

flow would be on the left while the down-estuary flow would be on the right. Mixing 

occurs because of the shear between these two flows. These flow patterns will be 

crucial in understanding and predicting slick movements and shore impacts. 

T O P V I E W

B8-17 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 8: POLLUTION INCIDENT INVESTIGATION 

NEGATI VE 

CIRCUL A TION 

ESTUARI ES: 

HYPER-SALI N E 

ESTUARI NE 

WATER 

PRODUCED BY 

EVAPORATION 

G.6.e. Negative Circulation Estuaries 

Negative Circulation Estuaries develop in extremely warm climates when a high 

evaporation rates and very low river flows at the head of the estuary result in 

increased estuarine water salinity relative to the ocean, where salinity is almost 

unchanging irrespective of weather. This hyper-saline estuarine water sinks and flows 

seawards across the estuarine floor, while seawater flows landward at the surface. 

Negative Circulation Estuaries are thought to be rare in North America, but can 

develop in the Caribbean and South Pacific. 

 S I D E VI E W

B8-18 
USCG Marine Safety Manual 

Volume V: Investigations and Enforcement

PART B: INVESTIGATION

Chapter Nine: 

Personnel Investigations
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 9: PERSONNEL INVESTIGATION 

B9-i 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

A. PERSONNEL INVESTIGATIONS ..................... 1

A.1. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................................................1

A.2. ENFORCEMENT FOLLOWING A PERSONNEL INVESTIGATION ............................................................................................1

A.3. STEPS IN CONDUCTING A PERSONNEL INVESTIGATION ....................................................................................................1

B. STEP ONE: DETECTION OF INCIDENTS ............. 2

B.1. GENERAL..........................................................................................................................................................................2

B.2. DETECTION METHODS......................................................................................................................................................2

B.3. REVIEW OF LOGBOOK ENTRIES........................................................................................................................................2

B.3.a. Official Logbook Entries ..........................................................................................................................................2

B.3.b. Criteria For Investigation ........................................................................................................................................2

B.3.c. Adequacy of Entries..................................................................................................................................................3

B.4. COMPLAINTS AS A METHOD OF DETECTING INCIDENTS ...................................................................................................3

B.4.a. Written Complaints...................................................................................................................................................3

B.4.b. Telephoned Complaints............................................................................................................................................3

B.4.c. Disclosure Of Defects and Protection of Informants................................................................................................3

B.5. INFORMATION OBTAINED FROM CONSULS ......................................................................................................................4

B.6. ISSUANCE OF SUBPOENAS................................................................................................................................................4

C. STEP TWO: FACT FINDING ..................... 4

C.1. SCOPE OF FACT FINDING...................................................................................................................................................4

C.2. EVIDENCE.........................................................................................................................................................................4

C.2.a. General.....................................................................................................................................................................4

C.2.b. Initial Fact Finding Investigative Efforts.................................................................................................................4

C.2.c. Additional Efforts.....................................................................................................................................................4

C.3. SHIPBOARD INVESTIGATIONS ...........................................................................................................................................5

C.3.a. Etiquette ...................................................................................................................................................................5

C.3.b. Privacy .....................................................................................................................................................................5

C.3.c. Completion Of Investigation.....................................................................................................................................5

D. STEP THREE: IDENTIFY LAWS AND REGULATIONS IN FORCE

............................................. 5

D.1. GENERAL .........................................................................................................................................................................5

D.2. MINIMUM CONTENT OF REPORT OF APPARENT VIOLATION.............................................................................................5

D.3. FRAUDULENT MMC APPLICATIONS.................................................................................................................................6

D.4. INTOXICATION..................................................................................................................................................................6

D.4.a. General ....................................................................................................................................................................6

D.4.b. Intoxication Standards.............................................................................................................................................6

D.4.c. Detection of Intoxication Incidents ..........................................................................................................................6

D.4.d. Operational Controls...............................................................................................................................................6

D.5. FAILURE TO OBEY ...........................................................................................................................................................7

D.6. ABSENCE OVER LEAVE (AOL), ABSENCE WITHOUT LEAVE (AWOL), AND FAILURE TO JOIN.......................................7

D.7. NEGLIGENCE ....................................................................................................................................................................7

D.8. OIL POLLUTION INCIDENTS ..............................................................................................................................................7

D.9. USE OF NARCOTICS AND OTHER DANGEROUS DRUGS ....................................................................................................7

D.9.a. Action Required Upon Receipt Of Positive Chemical Tests.....................................................................................7
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 9: PERSONNEL INVESTIGATION 

B9-ii 

D.9.b. Fatal Flaws In Dangerous Drug Use Investigations ...............................................................................................8

D.10. GUIDELINES FOR REPORTS OF SEXUAL OFFENSES AND HARASSMENT .........................................................................8

D.10.a. Investigation...........................................................................................................................................................8

D.10.b. Failure To Report A Sexual Offense ......................................................................................................................9

E. STEP FOUR: REVIEW THE PEOPLE INVOLVED .......... 9

E.1. GENERAL...........................................................................................................................................................................9

E.2. DEFINITIONS.....................................................................................................................................................................9

E.2.a. Merchant Mariner’s Credentials (MMC).................................................................................................................9

E.2.b. MMC Holder ............................................................................................................................................................9

E.2.c. Suspension and Revocation (S&R) Proceedings ......................................................................................................9

E.2.d. Non-MMC Holder ..................................................................................................................................................10

E.3. PROOF OF PERSON INVOLVED.........................................................................................................................................10

E.4. INVESTIGATIONS PERTAINING TO MMCS........................................................................................................................10

E.5. MARINERS ON PUBLIC VESSELS .....................................................................................................................................10

E.6. INVESTIGATING PILOTS ...................................................................................................................................................10

E.7. LABOR - MANAGEMENT DISPUTES .................................................................................................................................11

F. STEP FIVE: CONSIDER HUMAN ERROR ............. 11

F.1. INTRODUCTION ...............................................................................................................................................................11

F.2. HUMAN ERROR AS DIRECT VIOLATION OF LAW OR REGULATION ..................................................................................11

G. STEP SIX: CONSIDER OMISSIONS................ 12

G.1. GENERAL .......................................................................................................................................................................12

H. STEP SEVEN: CONSIDER THE EVIDENCE FOR EACH ELEMENT

............................................ 12

H.1. GENERAL .......................................................................................................................................................................12

H.2. TYPE AND QUALITY OF EVIDENCE .................................................................................................................................12

I. STEP EIGHT: REPORT APPARENT VIOLATIONS....... 12

I.1. GENERAL.........................................................................................................................................................................12

I.2. MARITIME INFORMATION FOR SAFETY AND LAW ENFORCEMENT COMPUTER SYSTEM (MISLE) ...................................13

I.3. REFERRAL FOR ENFORCEMENT IN THE REPORT OF INVESTIGATION.................................................................................13

I.4. STATEMENTS OF NO EVIDENCE .......................................................................................................................................13

J. OTHER INVESTIGATIVE ISSUES .................. 13

J.1. INTERACTION WITH MARINE BOARDS OF INVESTIGATION .............................................................................................13

J.1.a. General Principles..................................................................................................................................................13

J.1.b. Simultaneous Activities ...........................................................................................................................................13

J.1.c. Further Development ..............................................................................................................................................14

J.2. DUAL INVESTIGATIONS ...................................................................................................................................................14

J.3. TRANSFER OF INVESTIGATION OWNERSHIP WITHIN THE COAST GUARD........................................................................14

J.4. REFERRAL TO THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE (DOJ)......................................................................................................14

K. INTERNAL ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES ............ 14

K.1. SUSPENDED CASES.........................................................................................................................................................14

K.2. COMMENDATIONS OF MARINERS ...................................................................................................................................15
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 9: PERSONNEL INVESTIGATION 

B9-iii 

K.3. HEADQUARTERS ASSISTANCE.........................................................................................................................................15
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 9: PERSONNEL INVESTIGATION 

B9-1 

A.1.

INTRODUCTION

A.2. ENFORCEMENT 

FOLLOWING A 

PERSONNEL 

INVESTIGATION

All Coast Guard investigations are pursued under the multiple law enforcement 

authorities granted to the agency. Accordingly, investigations are not administrative, 

civil, or criminal; they are a fact-finding mission. Upon completion and based upon 

the facts of the investigation, the COTP/OCMI and the District Commander will 

decide upon the appropriate enforcement action (if any), which may be criminal, civil, 

or administrative, or any combination. Accordingly, all investigations may be said to 

potentially be “criminal” investigations, though as a matter of policy an IO shall not 

begin a personnel investigation with a presumption regarding criminal or civil 

offenses. 

A.3. STEPS IN 

CONDUCTING A 

PERSONNEL 

INVESTIGATION

In general, the following steps apply to all personnel investigations: 

Step One: Detection of Incidents; 

Step Two: Fact Finding; 

Step Three: Identify Laws and Regulations in Force; 

Step Four: Review the People Involved; 

Step Five: Consider Human Error; 

Step Six: Consider Omissions; 

Step Seven: Consider the Evidence for Each Element; and

Step Eight: Report Alleged Violations. 

A. PERSONNEL INVESTIGATIONS

Violations by personnel of statutes and regulations enforced by the Coast Guard can 

result in criminal or civil penalties taken against the person and/or administrative 

proceedings or other alternative administrative action against merchant mariners' 

credentials (MMCs) issued to the person by the Coast Guard. Procedures for 

processing civil penalty violations, evidence of criminal violations and enforcement 

tools available to the Officer in Charge, Marine Inspection (OCMI) and Captain of 

the Port (COTP) are discussed in Part C of this volume. This chapter provides policy 

guidance for conducting personnel investigations. Personnel investigations are 

conducted to promote safety on the high seas and the navigable waters of the United 

States, and to prevent or mitigate personnel related hazards to life, property, and the 

marine environment. 

IOs shall under no circumstances indicate that an investigation is “non-criminal” 

or “only administrative.” If questioned by a witness or involved person regarding 

legal or civil liability, the IO shall respond with words to the effect that “it is 

inappropriate for me to give you legal advice, but you are free to confer with counsel 

if you wish.” While it is generally unnecessary to explain enforcement consequences 

of a personnel investigation, IOs shall explain, if questioned, that the government is 

free to initiate criminal, civil, or administrative enforcement actions based on the facts 

of the case, and that taking one enforcement action does not preclude the others. 

NOTE: Causal analysis is not normally a part of a personnel investigation. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 9: PERSONNEL INVESTIGATION 

B9-2 

B.1. GENERAL

B.2. DETECTION 

METHODS

The following list outlines the various ways that the Coast Guard detects incidents: 

Reports From the Public; 

Active Surveillance / Detection Operations; 

Reports from Other Coast Guard Units; 

Reports from Other Law Enforcement Agencies; and 

Reports from Foreign Governments and the International Maritime Organization. 

Accordingly, IOs should perform the fact finding process discussed chapter B3 of 

this volume, along with the violation analysis discussed in chapter B5. IOs may 

conduct human error analysis as described in chapter B4 when they believe such 

information will be of value in considering the appropriate enforcement action. 

B. STEP ONE: DETECTION OF INCIDENTS

In general the majority of detections of incidents leading to personnel investigations 

come from passive detection. A majority of this type of detection is reported by the 

public, and is often an investigation that runs with some other incident investigation 

(i.e. marine casualty). Personnel investigations stemming from vessel casualties 

should begin as soon as possible and should not await the completion of the marine 

casualty report of investigation (ROI). If someone conducts the personnel 

investigation other than the IO conducting the marine casualty investigation, close 

coordination between the two will be necessary. 

See Chapter B2 of this volume for the specifics on each detection method. Generally 

speaking, there is nothing specific to personnel investigations with regard to detection 

methods, however, more common detection methods and supporting information 

are listed below. 

B.3. REVIEW OF 

LOGBOOK ENTRIES

B.3.a. Official Logbook Entries 

B.3.b. Criteria For Investigation 

One source of complaints will be Official Logbooks. Coast Guard marine safety 

personnel should take every opportunity to examine vessel logs submitted to Coast 

Guard offices or when on board a commercial vessel. In this regard, liaison with 

shipping agents and local company representatives can be beneficial with regard to 

alerting IOs to shipboard problems and arranging visits to arriving vessels. Official 

Logbooks must be maintained as specified in 46 USC 11301. Additional guidance is 

provided in the Official Logbook (Form CG 706B) and Navigation and Vessel 

Inspection Circular (NVIC) 1-86. 

Official logbooks should be reviewed by the final port of voyage in a timely manner 

to determine if actionable offenses occurred during the voyage. Not every entry 

logged against a mariner should be considered a complaint. Only when those entries 

showing a compromise of safety or hazard to life, property, and/or the marine 

environment or when the seaman has a history of repeated offenses should an 

investigation be initiated.
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 9: PERSONNEL INVESTIGATION 

B9-3 

B.3.c. Adequacy of Entries 

B.4. COMPLAINTS 

AS A METHOD OF 

DETECTING 

INCIDENTS

B.4.a. Written Complaints 

B.4.b. Telephoned Complaints 

B.4.c. Disclosure Of Defects and Protection of 

Informants 

The value of identifying and reporting hazardous or unsafe conditions by concerned 

mariners to the Coast Guard has long been recognized. Under 46 USC 3315, Coast 

Guard personnel are prohibited from disclosing, except as authorized by the 

Secretary, the name of an individual who reports vessel defects or imperfections in 

matters subject to regulations and inspections. This nondisclosure policy has for 

some time been extended to unlicensed persons as well. Additionally, 46 USC 2114 

protects seaman from recrimination for notifying the Coast Guard of unsafe 

conditions or practices. 

Log entries should be reviewed to ensure that they have been made in compliance 

with applicable law. If they have not, the master should be advised to the deficiencies 

to prevent recurrence in future entries. Since a log entry can, under some 

circumstances, serve as sufficient evidence to prove a complaint in subsequent S&R 

proceedings, masters should be encouraged to provide ample information in the 

logbook, even to the point of making a special entry or attaching additional 

statements received during the master’s investigation. When interacting with vessel 

masters, the importance of attaching statements taken by the master and referring 

them in log entries so that they will be accepted as parts of the log when presented as 

evidence should be carefully explained. See figures B9-1 and B9-2 for sample 

logbook review checklists. 

Receipt of any letter of complaint concerning a mariner is sufficient reason to 

commence a personnel investigation. Some form of acknowledgment of receipt shall 

be made as soon as practicable. 

A telephoned complaint is sufficient to commence a personnel investigation. If 

possible, the IO should note the identity of the caller and the information received. 

As a matter of policy, most of our reports are “public information” and, therefore, 

releasable to the public under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). Seaman that 

are protected from disclosure will be entered into the MISLE computer system as a 

confidential source and will not be named (will be REDACTED by CG-5453) in 

anything that is releasable (i.e. the report of investigation (ROI)). Additionally, the 

seaman will not have any Party Associations within MISLE. Instead, any variation of 

the following statement should be used, “The Coast Guard received confidential 

information concerning...” Additionally, review the information gathered to ensure 

that there are no obvious implications as to the source. References to a person 

covered by this paragraph should be avoided; however, if a reference must be made, 

the individual shall be referred to as the confidential source. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 9: PERSONNEL INVESTIGATION 

B9-4 

B.5.

INFORMATION 

OBTAINED FROM 

CONSULS

B.6. ISSUANCE OF 

SUBPOENAS

C.1. SCOPE OF 

FACT FINDING

C.2. EVIDENCE C.2.a. General 

C.2.b. Initial Fact Finding Investigative Efforts 

Upon receipt of a complaint, sufficient information should be obtained to determine 

the proper method and scope of investigation. Wanted List should be checked in all 

cases. If a verbal complaint is received, probing questions may be sufficient. If the 

complaint is written, review of local files, communications with Headquarters, and 

other activities may be helpful in generating sufficient information. The information 

initially received will determine what method the IO will pursue for further 

investigation. 

C.2.c. Additional Efforts 

Occasionally, information needed for a personnel investigation must be obtained 

from a U.S. Consul; this may include court or medical records. OCMI's are 

authorized to correspond directly with U.S. Consuls for the purpose of requesting 

routine records needed for personnel investigations. In many instances, however, the 

Consul may be reluctant to release information without specific authority from 

superiors or he or she may have difficulty obtaining such records. In such cases, the 

Office of Investigations and Analysis, Commandant (CG-545) should be notified so 

that the request for information may be forwarded to the Department of State 

(DOS). This method also facilitates tracer action if information is lost in transit. 

The IO may issue subpoenas to obtain the attendance of witnesses or production of 

books, papers, documents, or other relevant evidence needed by the IO. Subpoenas 

shall not be issued by IOs when acting solely under 14 USC 89 authority. See 

Chapters A2 and A3 of this volume for further information on various authorities 

under which an IO can issue subpoenas. 

C. STEP TWO: FACT FINDING

The objective of the fact finding step of the investigation is to collect as many facts as 

possible which may help in understanding the potential violation and the events 

surrounding it. IOs should be aware of the danger of reaching conclusions too early, 

thereby failing to keep an open mind and considering the full range of possibilities. 

See Chapter B3 of this volume for more information. 

Proper evidence collection and handling are of paramount importance. See Chapter 

B3 of this volume for more information. 

If the preliminary investigation indicates possible S&R action against an MMC, all 

available additional information and evidence should be obtained as quickly as 

possible. The information contained in Official Logbooks and Shipping Articles, for 

instance, is considered a minimal resource to be supplemented with statements from 

prospective witnesses, diagrams, photographs, etc. This supplemental information 

should be obtained even though it may not be used as evidence in subsequent 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 9: PERSONNEL INVESTIGATION 

B9-5 

C.3. SHIPBOARD 

INVESTIGATIONS

C.3.a. Etiquette 

C.3.b. Privacy 

C.3.c. Completion Of Investigation 

D.1. GENERAL

D.2. MINIMUM 

CONTENT OF REPORT 

OF APPARENT 

VIOLATION

At a minimum, IOs must indicate: 

- Which law or regulation may have been violated; 

- The jurisdictional elements of that law or regulation; 

- The facts of the case constituting evidence of each jurisdictional element; 

- The factual elements of that law or regulation; 

- The facts of the case which constitute evidence of each factual element; and 

actions. In very serious or complex cases, or instances of possible protracted delay 

before final action, statements signed under oath should be obtained from witnesses.

When first boarding a vessel, the IO should report his or her presence and purpose 

to the master or senior deck officer. Reasonable efforts should be made to conserve 

the master's time. 

Since most investigations require interviews of crewmembers, the IO should request 

the use of an area where privacy can be ensured. This will enable the IO to interview 

personnel privately, with as little distraction as possible. Witnesses should not be 

interviewed together. 

The IO should, as far as reasonable, stay aboard the vessel until the investigation is 

completed. This will ordinarily be possible because most "leads" can usually be 

developed on the ship. The IO should strive to complete the investigation in 

sufficient time to avoid a delay in sailing. 

D. STEP THREE: IDENTIFY LAWS AND REGULATIONS IN FORCE

IOs should have a working knowledge of the major laws and regulations that the 

Coast Guard enforces. This ranges from both Titles 33 and 46 of the U.S. Code and 

Code of Federal Regulations, as well as Title 18, U.S. Code. Additionally, a working 

knowledge of the Maritime Law Enforcement Manual, COMDTINST M16247.1 

(series) and the Investigations Manual, COMDTINST M5527.1 (series) will be of 

great benefit. All laws and regulations are composed of two basic sets of elements: 

the jurisdictional elements governing where and to whom the law applies; and the 

factual elements governing the acts or conditions involved. To determine whether a 

given law or regulation was in force at the time of an incident, the IO must evaluate 

the jurisdictional elements of that law or regulation. This section will briefly discuss 

the content of report of violation and some of the more common offenses that an IO 

might be called upon to investigate. The last line of each paragraph will explain 

to whom the offense applies (i.e. MMC holders, everyone, or non-MMC 

holders).
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 9: PERSONNEL INVESTIGATION 

B9-6 

D.3. FRAUDULENT 

MMC APPLICATIONS

D.4.

INTOXICATION

D.4.a. General 

33 CFR 95 conveys the Coast Guard’s stance on the use of alcohol in the maritime 

community and established rules to minimize incidents of individuals operating a 

vessel while intoxicated. 46 CFR 4.05-12 further requires that marine casualty ROIs 

include information on whether or not the use of alcohol contributed to the casualty. 

Additionally, 46 CFR 16.240 requires drug and alcohol tests be conducted on 

individuals involved in serious marine incidents. 

D.4.b. Intoxication Standards 

D.4.c. Detection of Intoxication Incidents 

D.4.d. Operational Controls 

- The person culpable for the possible violation. 

Any MMCs issued upon submission of false information are void. See Commandant 

Decision on Appeal 2025. When a fraudulent application results in the issuance of an 

original MMC, the credential is considered void and may be recovered without the 

process of an Administrative Hearing. When a fraudulent application results in the 

issuance of a MMC renewal, current policy requires an Administrative Hearing where 

the proper sanction is revocation. See Appeal Decisions 2205 & 2569. Under 18 

USC 1001, intentionally false or fraudulent statements or representations made in any 

matter within the jurisdiction of any department or agency of the United States are 

punishable by a $10,000 fine or 5 years' imprisonment, or both. IOs should consider 

forwarding cases involving false or fraudulent statements to the appropriate Area, 

MLC or District legal office for consideration of referring the case to the local U.S. 

Attorney for prosecution. (MMC holders) 

(everyone) 

33 CFR 95 sets intoxication standards based upon blood alcohol concentration 

(BAC) levels and/or observed behavior; defines what constitutes reasonable cause for 

chemical testing of individuals; and establishes certain operating rules for commercial 

marine personnel serving aboard inspected vessels.

The marine employer is responsible for the detection and reduction of incidents 

involving intoxicated operators aboard commercial vessels. OCMIs and COTPs 

should review the evidence that marine employers submit of intoxication in a timely 

manner. If the submitted evidence is inadequate to support enforcement action, the 

marine employer should be informed of specific discrepancies discovered so that 

adequate evidence is presented in future situations. 

The OCMI or COTP has discretion to decide if operational controls should be 

initiated. Voyages shall be terminated by use of COTP orders or OCMI termination 

letters (coordinated through the servicing District office), unless there is another 

operator who is capable and properly licensed to operate the vessel. See the Maritime 

Law Enforcement Manual, COMDTINST M16247.1 (series) and Part C of this 

manual for additional guidance with regard to enforcement. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 9: PERSONNEL INVESTIGATION 

B9-7 

D.5. FAILURE TO 

OBEY

Whenever the basis of a complaint is refusal or failure to obey an order, the evidence 

should show: 

- That the order was not in the nature of a request; 

- That it was properly communicated to the individual being investigated; 

- That it was lawful; and 

- That it was directly connected with the safe operations of the vessel. 

D.6. ABSENCE 

OVER LEAVE 

(AOL), ABSENCE 

WITHOUT LEAVE 

(AWOL), AND 

FAILURE TO JOIN

An investigation should be conducted to establish that the absence of the mariner 

created a situation in which the safety of the vessel, passengers, crew, or marine 

environment was adversely affected; the fact that the absence created a crew shortage 

below the complement required by the Certificate of Inspection (COI) usually 

establishes such an adverse effect. 

(MMC holder) 

D.7. NEGLIGENCE When conducting investigations possibly concerning negligence IO's should 

determine whether they can establish the following elements: 

What a “reasonable and prudent person’s” duty in the same conditions would have 

been; and 

Whether the error was a clear breach of that duty. 

Negligent operation of a vessel is generally prohibited under Title 46 U.S.C. 2302(a) 

when such negligent operation endangers the life, limb, or property of a person. This 

statute applies only on the U.S. territorial sea, however. Title 46 CFR 5.101(a)(1) and 

table 5.569 suggest that sanctions are appropriate for acts of negligence by mariners 

holding and acting under the authority of an MMC. Acts of negligence by non-U.S. 

mariners when outside the U.S. territorial sea, or when such negligence does not

endanger the life, limb, or property of a person should not be considered a violation 

of U.S. law or regulation. Wake damages and navigation interference are good 

examples of negligence issues that should be investigated and referred for 

enforcement. 

D.8. OIL 

POLLUTION 

INCIDENTS 

A personnel investigation shall be conducted in all instances when the actions or nonactions of a mariner apparently caused or contributed to the cause of an oil pollution 

incident. See Chapter B8 of this volume for further information. 

(everyone) 

D.9. USE OF 

NARCOTICS AND 

OTHER DANGEROUS 

DRUGS

D.9.a. Action Required Upon Receipt Of Positive 

Chemical Tests 

 (MMC holder) 

(everyone) 

When a chemical test report indicates a positive result, the IO shall review it closely. 

If it appears that the test result is flawed due to the circumstances such as those listed 

below, the viability of pursuing further enforcement action shall be evaluated. If the 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 9: PERSONNEL INVESTIGATION 

B9-8 

D.9.b. Fatal Flaws In Dangerous Drug Use 

Investigations 

Commandant's Decision on Appeal (CDOA) number 2555 vacated a finding of 

proved for the use of dangerous drugs because of a fatal flaw in the chain of custody 

surrounding the test specimen in question. In that case, the collector neglected to 

obtain the donor's signature on the custody and control form. This flaw went 

undetected through the lab analysis, the Medical Review Officer (MRO) review and 

subsequent Coast Guard preferring of charges before the Administrative Law Judge 

(ALJ). The integrity of the chemical testing program relies on the substantial 

compliance with prescribed procedures. IOs shall conduct a thorough review of all 

the facts of a case before pursuing enforcement actions. Although the check of a 

specimen's chain of custody is the responsibility of the MRO, it is important that IOs 

review supporting material during their investigation to ensure that all applicable 

regulations have been complied with before initiating enforcement action. Failure to 

do so could result in wasted time and effort for all involved parties. The most 

significant piece of documentation available to the IO in a drug use case is the 

custody and control form. IOs shall become familiar with the Department of 

Transportation (DOT) regulations, 49 CFR Part 40, and specifically Subpart I 

Problems in Drug Testing, 40.191 – 40.209, to ensure that complaints are not issued 

when a flaw in the testing procedures has not been corrected. DOT has listed the 

following “fatal flaws” in 40.199 concerning the viability of a specimen for use in 

respect to enforcement: 

Specimen Identification Number (ID) on the specimen bottle and custody and 

control form (CCF) do not match; 

No printed collector's name and no collector’s signature; 

The specimen bottle seal is broken or shows evidence of tampering (and a split 

specimen cannot be redesignated, see 49 CFR 40.83(g)); 

D.10. GUIDELINES 

FOR REPORTS OF 

SEXUAL OFFENSES 

AND HARASSMENT

D.10.a. Investigation 

Reports of sexual abuse and harassment should be taken seriously and investigated 

immediately. Interviewing victims of crimes of a sexual nature requires 

comprehensive knowledge of victim/witness rights and the need to ensure that 

victims are not subjected to re-victimization through the investigative process. 46 

USC 10104 - Requirement to Report Sexual Offenses, requires a master, or other 

individual in charge, to report complaints of sexual offenses to the Coast Guard. 

Complaints may also be received from the victim, witness, or other law enforcement 

report appears to be complete, the IO shall notify the marine employer to ensure that 

the mariner is removed from any safety sensitive position, and initiate enforcement 

action. Questions regarding the seriousness of specific flaws and the viability of 

certain evidence for use in the enforcement process should be addressed to the 

Office of Investigations and Casualty Analysis, Commandant (CG-545). 

Because of leakage or other causes, there is an insufficient amount of urine in the 

primary specimen bottle for analysis and the specimens cannot be redesignated, see 

40.83(g) 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 9: PERSONNEL INVESTIGATION 

B9-9 

agencies. 18 USCG Chapter 109A - Sexual Abuse, defines the sexual offenses which 

are required to be reported under 46 USCG 10104. The offenses described in 

Chapter 109A are: 

Aggravated sexual abuse; 

Sexual abuse; 

Sexual abuse of a minor or ward; and 

Abusive sexual contact. 

D.10.b. Failure To Report A Sexual Offense 

E.1. GENERAL

E.2. DEFINITIONS E.2.a. Merchant Mariner’s Credentials (MMC) 

E.2.b. MMC Holder 

E.2.c. Suspension and Revocation (S&R) Proceedings 

Investigating offenses of a sexual nature requires specialized training and experience. 

IOs shall immediately forward to the Coast Guard Investigative Service via the 

cognizant District Commander all alleged, actual or suspected incidents of aggravated 

sexual abuse, sexual abuse, sexual abuse of a minor or ward, and abusive sexual 

contact. The Coast Guard Investigative Service, in consultation with the appropriate 

servicing legal office, will determine appropriate investigative action and notification 

of other agencies, including the FBI, as necessary.

46 USC 10104(b) authorizes up to a $6500.00 civil penalty against a master, or other 

individual in charge, who knowingly fails to report a complaint of sexual abuse to the 

Coast Guard. The Investigating Officer (IO) shall process an Administrative Class 1 

Civil Penalty against the master, or other individual in charge, if the investigation 

finds that the master, or other individual in charge knew of the incident, and the 

complaint was made to the Coast Guard by the victim, witnesses, or other law 

enforcement agency. 

E. STEP FOUR: REVIEW THE PEOPLE INVOLVED

To establish jurisdiction over a person or organization, the IO must accurately 

identify who was involved (generally, this is not an issue). Further, for any 

subsequent enforcement action to be effective contact information for that person 

must be complete and accurate. 

MMCs are any License, Certificate of Registry (COR), Merchant Mariner Document 

(MMD) or STCW Certificate issued by the Coast Guard authorizing service on 

vessels, as required by various statutes and regulations. 

An MMC holder is a mariner who has been issued any MMC by the Coast Guard. 

S&R proceedings are proceedings against MMCs under the authority of 46 USC 

Chapter 77. See Part C of this volume for additional information. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 9: PERSONNEL INVESTIGATION 

B9-10 

E.2.d. Non-MMC Holder 

E.3. PROOF OF 

PERSON INVOLVED

Evidence of the individual’s role as owner, operator, or other persons working 

aboard the vessel is extremely important. It is important to have evidence in the file 

as to who the actual owner/operator and other persons working aboard the vessel 

were at the time of the violation. Examples of proof of identify can include but are 

not limited to: 

- Copy of vessel’s documentation/Certificate of Inspection (if applicable); 

- Copies of vessel’s log entries/ship’s papers; 

- Copies of a person’s MMC (if required for the job they were performing); 

- Company work schedules; or 

E.4.

INVESTIGATIONS 

PERTAINING TO 

MMCS

See: 46 USC 7703

A jurisdictional element that must be established when taking enforcement action 

against an MMC are that the person is: 

a holder of; and/or 

acting under the authority of a MMC. 

E.5. MARINERS ON 

PUBLIC VESSELS

E.6.

INVESTIGATING 

Generally these mariners are deckhands or some other position aboard a vessel that is 

not required hold a Coast Guard issued license, certificate of registry, or document. 

The vessel’s manning requirements determine whether the position is required to be 

on the vessel.

- A witness’ statement as to the role of the individuals on board. 

The first element must always be present to take enforcement action against an 

MMC, while the second element is not. Always establish these jurisdictional elements 

early in the investigation. Additional guidance on jurisdiction over MMC holders and 

when a mariner is considered acting under the authority of a MMC can be found in 

Chapter C4 of this manual. 

A mariner hired to serve on a public vessel on the condition that he or she holds an 

MMC is subject to S&R proceedings and thus are subject to personnel investigations 

for their actions. As defined in 46 USC 2101; a vessel that is owned, or demise 

chartered, and operated by the United States Government or a government of a 

foreign country; and is not engaged in commercial service. A public vessel of the 

United States is not subject to Coast Guard inspection, and is exempt from certain 

other navigation and vessel inspection requirements (except vessels owned, operated, 

or controlled by the Department of Transportation (DOT), as per 46 USC 2109. 

However, the Commandant has signed an Inspection and Certification Agreement 

with the Commander, Military Sealift Command (MSC), and the U.S. Army Corps of 

Engineers (ACOE) concerning disciplinary actions against merchant mariners serving 

on board MSC and ACOE vessels. IOs shall conduct personnel investigations into 

the actions of a civil service or contract crewmember when possession of an MMC is 

a condition of employment. 

The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit decided that a state pilot, 

not required to hold a license under federal law, is not acting under the authority of 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 9: PERSONNEL INVESTIGATION 

B9-11 

PILOTS

E.7. LABOR - MANAGEMENT 

DISPUTES

F.1.

INTRODUCTION

F.2. HUMAN ERROR Human error encompasses decisions and actions. In some instances, the action 

the pilot's federal license, although it is required by the state before it will issue the 

state license. See Soriano v. U.S., 494 F. 2d 681 (9th Cir. 1974). The U.S. District 

Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana decided that former 46 USC 214 does 

not, by itself, authorize enforcement proceedings against federal licenses held by 

pilots acting under authority of state licenses. See Dietze v. Siler, 414 F. Supp. 1105, 

(E.D. LA., 1976). The Commandant's policy is to follow the Soriano and Dietze 

decisions in cases involving pilots acting under the authority of state commissions. 

However, the offenses listed in 46 USC 7703(2)-(5) and 7704 are holder offenses and 

S&R action may be initiated on the federal pilot’s license for state pilots who are 

required to hold a federal license. Because of the complex nature of state pilot 

investigations CG-545 should be contacted before any S&R action is taken regarding 

a federal pilot license. This policy does not affect investigative procedures 

concerning casualties and civil violations involving state pilots. Pilots acting under 

authority of federal licenses are subject to investigation and enforcement action under 

46 USC Chapter 77, as well as civil or criminal enforcement action. Pilots acting 

solely under the authority of a state license are subject to civil penalty action for 

violation of applicable statutes. Any evidence of criminal violation of federal statutes 

shall be referred to the servicing legal office for a determination as to whether to refer 

the case to the local U.S. attorney. If a violation is within the jurisdiction of a state or 

locality, the evidence should be referred to the cognizant state or district attorney. 

See also Commandant's Decision on Review 17 (POWER). 

IOs should not become involved in labor/management conflicts. If a preliminary 

investigation reveals that a contractual infraction did not affect the safety of the 

passengers, crew, vessel, marine environment, or national security, no further action 

should be taken. This policy requires OCMIs and their department heads to 

remember that IOs should not place themselves in roles as labor/management 

arbitrators. See 46 CFR 5.71; Appeal Decision 2470 (Giachetti). See Chapter A3 for 

specific information. 

F. STEP FIVE: CONSIDER HUMAN ERROR

Human error is a predictable part of the Marine Transportation System. When 

performing violation analysis, the IO must be alert to human error as: 1) an act 

expressly prohibited in a law or regulation; and 2) an act of professional 

incompetence, misconduct, or negligence. The term “human error” applies to a wide 

variety of human behaviors, as described in Chapter B4 of this volume. Skill-based 

errors, for instance, are significantly different from knowledge-based errors. In 

general, when considering whether a human error may be considered a violation 

(including negligence), the IO should use the following rule: unless the action 

violated a specific law or an error was made in good faith based on mistaken

judgment or misanalysis of an “unsettled” area (i.e., knowledge-based performance), 

the action or error does not usually rise to the level of negligence or misconduct. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 9: PERSONNEL INVESTIGATION 

B9-12 

AS DIRECT 

VIOLATION OF LAW 

OR REGULATION

performed in error (unintended or willful) will be directly prohibited by law or 

regulation. In such cases, regardless of intent, the error should be treated as a 

violation of that regulation or law. The intent of the person involved, however, is 

relevant in assessing the appropriate level of enforcement. See Chapter B6 of this 

volume for specific details concerning various violations of law or regulation. 

G.1. GENERAL

H.1. GENERAL

H.2. TYPE AND 

QUALITY OF 

EVIDENCE

The type and quality of evidence is critical to the violation analysis. No matter how 

thoroughly a facility inspection, vessel boarding, or pollution investigation was 

conducted, a violation will not be found to exist if the evidentiary package is not 

collected and submitted to the hearing officer. Keep in mind, a violation cannot be 

said to have occurred unless there is sufficient competent evidence to establish every 

element of the alleged violation. See Chapter B6 of this volume for specific details 

concerning evidence for each element.

I.1. GENERAL

G. STEP SIX: CONSIDER OMISSIONS

In performing violation analysis, the Investigating Officer (IO) must also be alert for 

specific actions which a mariner or other person: 1) was explicitly required to 

perform by law or regulation, but which they failed to perform; or 2) was required by 

standards of professional competence, formalized (non-regulatory) rule, or accepted 

standards of attention to duty, but which they failed to perform. In these cases, the 

failure to take an action or make a judgment may be considered a violation, just as 

taking an action would. See Chapter B6 of this volume for specific details concerning 

omissions. 

H. STEP SEVEN: CONSIDER THE EVIDENCE FOR EACH ELEMENT

Because no two cases are factually the same, it is impossible to provide a cookbook 

listing of the evidence that needs to be gathered in each incident to support a prima 

facie case. In general, the government must present sufficient competent evidence 

establishing every element of an alleged violation before a violation can be found to 

have occurred. Therefore, in analyzing violations, IOs must be aware of what types 

of evidence would best establish each element of a violation.

I. STEP EIGHT: REPORT APPARENT VIOLATIONS

Once analysis is complete, apparent violations should be referred for enforcement 

evaluation and appropriate action. The report SHOULD NOT CONCLUDE that a 

violation did or did not occur. Instead, having met the thresholds for evidence 

suggested above, the IO should report only that there is evidence of the specific 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 9: PERSONNEL INVESTIGATION 

B9-13 

I.2. MARITIME 

INFORMATION FOR 

SAFETY AND LAW 

ENFORCEMENT 

COMPUTER SYSTEM 

(MISLE) 

I.3. REFERRAL 

FOR ENFORCEMENT IN 

THE REPORT OF 

INVESTIGATION

I.4. STATEMENTS 

OF NO EVIDENCE

J.1. INTERACTION 

WITH MARINE BOARDS 

OF INVESTIGATION

J.1.a. General Principles 

The OCMI of the port in which a Marine Board of Investigation is held shall conduct 

a personnel investigation as soon as sufficient information indicates a possible 

violation of law or regulation by a person under Coast Guard jurisdiction. This 

information may be obtained during a preliminary casualty investigation or from 

evidence received by the Marine Board. The IO or the IO's representative should 

arrange to attend those sessions that the IO deems appropriate. Under no 

circumstances should a personnel investigation resulting from a marine casualty 

interfere with the work of the Marine Board. Liaison between the IO and the Marine 

Board recorder will provide a smooth flow of information that will be helpful to the 

IO, and possibly the Marine Board. The following actions might be considered: 

Advise the recorder of any personnel investigation being contemplated; and 

J.1.b. Simultaneous Activities 

apparent violation warranting further enforcement evaluation. 

All personnel investigations shall be documented in the MISLE computer system in 

accordance with applicable CG-545 data entry policy, and the MISLE Investigations 

and Enforcement Process Guides. As a matter of policy, IO's will document all

reports of apparent violation in MISLE in the relevant detection activity. Direct 

entry of enforcement activities without record of the underlying investigation is 

expressly prohibited. 

Where a written ROI is prepared, the IO shall include only statements of the 

following form: “During the course of this investigation, sufficient evidence of an 

apparent violation of 46 CFR X.XX was discovered to warrant referral for 

enforcement evaluation. Final evaluation and agency action on this evidence will be 

reported separately.” 

IOs shall not include statements to the effect of “there is no evidence of negligence” 

and so on. In general the absence of a report of apparent violation in MISLE or the 

ROI speaks for itself. Where the IO is forced to directly answer such questions, a 

note to the effect of “insufficient evidence of negligence was available/encountered 

to warrant referral for enforcement evaluation,” should be made in the ROI.

J. OTHER INVESTIGATIVE ISSUES

Request permission to interview witnesses after the Marine Board has questioned 

them. 

Personnel investigations should be conducted after a Marine Board has convened 

only with the approval of the Marine Board Chairperson. If the Chairperson requests 

an abeyance until the Marine Board adjourns, investigative activities should be 

suspended. This is often requested so that the Marine Board has flexibility in 

developing recommendations for submittal to the Commandant. However, this does 

not preclude initiation of enforcement proceedings during the course of, or 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 9: PERSONNEL INVESTIGATION 

B9-14 

J.1.c. Further Development 

J.2. DUAL 

INVESTIGATIONS

J.3. TRANSFER OF 

INVESTIGATION 

OWNERSHIP WITHIN 

THE COAST GUARD

J.4. REFERRAL TO 

THE DEPARTMENT OF 

JUSTICE (DOJ) 

K.1. SUSPENDED 

CASES

immediately following, the Marine Board’s investigation. If sufficient information in 

the personnel investigation is developed before the casualty investigation is 

completed, enforcement action may be initiated. Prior to taking enforcement action, 

however, the Marine Board Chairperson should be notified and the Chairperson's 

recommendations respected. 

If, upon review of the Marine Board’s ROI the Commandant directs further 

personnel investigation, the IO shall obtain the initial information by the most 

expeditious means possible. 

On many occasions, information received during a Coast Guard investigation may be 

of importance to other federal, state, or local law enforcement authorities. These 

authorities should be notified at the earliest opportunity, to enable them to take early 

investigative action, if warranted. 

During the initial phase of an investigation, it may become apparent that necessary 

information is available outside the jurisdiction of the local OCMI. Generally, such 

information can be obtained by the OCMI with the appropriate area of responsibility 

(AOR) and forwarded to the IO conducting the investigation. However, if it is 

determined that all of the information needed is located in another AOR and that 

anticipated Coast Guard action will be taken there, the investigation may be 

transferred to that OCMI. 

When a personnel investigation reveals evidence of criminal liability, the IO should 

discuss the merits of the case with their servicing District Legal Office (dl) and 

possibly the local Coast Guard Investigative Service (CGIS) special agent for possible 

referral to the local U.S. Attorney for appropriate action. If the evidence indicates 

criminal liability within the jurisdiction of a state or locality, it should be forwarded to 

the District Commander with a recommendation for referral to the appropriate 

prosecutor. 

K. INTERNAL ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES

When a mariner under investigation cannot be located, the IO should complete the 

case as fully as possible and place the mariner on the Wanted List in MISLE for the 

purpose of an investigation. No Incident Investigation activity shall be transferred to 

CG-545 with a mariner still on the Wanted List for the purpose of an investigation. 

The investigation shall remain open until the mariner is located or there is no possible 

enforcement action that can be taken against the mariner, i.e. the 1 year grace period 

on the MMC has passed, or the statute of limitations for an offense under 46 USC 

Chapter 77 has expired. When the mariner under investigation cannot be located but 

evidence gathered indicates that S&R action under 46 USC Chapter 77 is warranted, 

the IO should complete a referral for enforcement creating an Enforcement Activity. 

The IO should develop the case in the Enforcement Activity as fully as possible and 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 9: PERSONNEL INVESTIGATION 

B9-15 

K.2.

COMMENDATIONS OF 

MARINERS

K.3. HEADQUARTERS 

ASSISTANCE

place the mariner on the Wanted List in MISLE for pending enforcement action. 

The IO shall place the activity in an “Open-Suspended” status until the mariner is 

located or the provisions for closing the activity contained in Chapter C4 are met. 

The activity shall include all the evidence collected, i.e., (but is not limited to) Official 

Logbook entries, abstracts of Shipping Articles, statements of witnesses, and their 

names, addresses, and telephone numbers. See also: Chapter C4 on locking mariner’s 

record. 

OCMI's may submit letters or other types of reports commending merchant mariners 

and officers to the Director, National Maritime Center (NMC4A). NMC4A 

encourages such submittals. All marine safety personnel should recognize instances 

of outstanding performance of duty by mariners and make suitable reports to 

NMC4A. They may also request information as to the prior record of a mariner for 

the completion and forwarding of such reports. 

Close liaison between field offices and CG-545 is desirable. Officers assigned to CG545 have the advantage of being exposed to a wide variety of cases and situations. In 

addition, they will be aware of the latest policy concerning various matters as well as 

non-criminal search tools and methods. IOs are encouraged to telephone CG-545 

when necessary to discuss problems of mutual concern. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 9: PERSONNEL INVESTIGATION 

B9-16 

FIGURE B9-1: Cargo & Miscellaneous Vessels Logbook Review Checklist 

VSL NAME: 

_______________________________ 

VOYAGE # OR DATES: 

______________________________

LOG BOOK #: 

______________________ 

_____ 46 CFR 97.15-3(a) –TESTS AND EXAMINATION BY SHIP’S OFFICER OF ENTIRE STEERING GEAR, WHISTLE, AND 

MEANS OF COMMS BETWEEN BRIDGE/PILOTHOUSE AND ENGINE ROOM, DATE OF TESTS AND CONDITION OF 

EQUIPEMENT.

□ VOYAGE > 48 HRS: REQUIRED WITHIN 12 HOURS OF DEPARTURE 

□ VOYAGE < 48 HRS: REQUIRED AT LEAST ONCE PER WEEK 

_____ 46 CFR 97.15-5(a) – DRAFTS, FORWARD AND AFT, WHEN LEAVING PORT

_____ 46 CFR 97.15-5(b) – POSITION OF LOAD LINE MARK, PORT & STBD, IN RELATION TO SURFACE OF WATER, AT 

TIME OF DEPARTURE 

_____ 46 CFR 97.15-7(c) – VSL’S STABILITY VERIFIED W/REQUIREMENTS OF TRIM AND STABILITY BOOK, STABILTY 

LTR, COI, AND LOAD LINE CERT. ENTRIES MADE AFTER LOADING, PRIOR TO DEPARTURE & AT ALL TIMES 

NECESSARY TO ENSURE THE SAFETY OF THE VSL 

_____ 46 CFR 97.15-17(c) – TIME AND DOOR LOCATION OF EVERY CLOSING OF LOADING DOORS 

_____ 46 CFR 97.15-17(d) – TIME AND CIRCUMSTANCES FOR ANY OPENING OF LOADING DOORS WHILE VSL IS AT 

ANCHOR IN PROTECTED WATERS

_____ 46 CFR 97.15-20(e) – TIME OF UNCOVERING, OPENING, CLOSING/COVERING OF HATCHES OR OTHER 

OPENINGS AFTER LEAVING PORT 

_____ 46 CFR 97.15-30(a) – OPERATION AND INSPECTION OF THE EMERGENCY LIGHTING & POWER SYSTEMS; ONCE 

EACH WEEK WHILE UNDERWAY 

_____ 46 CFR 97.15-30(b) – 2 HR OPERATION UNDERLOAD OF THE INTERNAL COMBUSTION ENGINE DRIVEN 

EMERGENCY GENERATOR; ONCE EACH MONTH WHILE UNDERWAY

_____ 46 CFR 97.15-30(c) –TESTS OF STORAGE BATTERIES FOR EMERGENCY LIGHTING & POWER SYSTEMS; ONCE 

EACH 6 MONTH PERIOD WHILE UNDERWAY 

_____ 46 CFR 97.15-55(a) – EACH SUPPLY OF FUEL OIL REC’D O/B, INCLUDING QUANTITY, VENDOR NAME, NAME OF 

OIL PRODUCER, AND THE FLASH POINT 

_____ 46 CFR 97.15-75(c) – DATE OF TESTS AND CONDITION OF INFLATABLE HOPPER GATE SEALS; TESTED AFTER 

EACH CARRIAGE OF CARGO 

_____ 46 CFR 97.35-5(a) – ONBOARD TRAINING, MUSTERS, AND DRILLS HELD IAW SUBCHAP W. ENTRIES MUST 

INCLUDE: 

□ DATE AND TIME OF DRILL, MUSTER OR TRAINING SESSION 

□ SURVIVAL CRAFT AND FIRE-EXTINGUISHING EQUIPMENT USED IN DRILL 

□ IDENTIFICATION OF INOP OR MALFUNCTIONING EQUIPMENT AND CORRECTIVE ACTION TAKEN 

□ IDENTIFICATION OF CREWMEMBERS PARTICIPATING IN DRILLS OR TRAINING 

□ SUBJECT OF ONBOARD TRAINING SESSION

□ CIRCUMSTANCES WHY FULL MUSTER, DRILL, OR TRAINING SESSION WAS NOT HELD AND EXTENT OF 

MUSTER, DRILL OR TRAINING SESSION

_____ 46 USC 11301(b) – BELOW LIST IS NOT ALL INCLUSIVE, SEE STATUTE FOR ENTIRE LIST

□ LEGAL CONVICTION OF SEAMAN & PUNISHMENT 

□ OFFENSE COMMITTED BY SEAMAN 

□ STATEMENT OF CONDUCT, CHARACTER, & QUALIFICATIONS OF EACH SEAMAN OR STATEMENT THAT 

MASTER DECLINED TO GIVE OPINION 

□ ILLNESS/INJURY TO SEAMAN, NATURE OF ILLNESS/INJURY & TREATMENT 

□ STATEMENT ABOUT ANY MARINE CASUALTIES AND THE CIRCUMSTANCES UNDER WHICH IT 

OCCURRED 

_____ DISCUSS W/SIO ANY ITEMS WHICH WARRANT INITIATION OF CG ENFORCEMENT ACTION 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 9: PERSONNEL INVESTIGATION 

B9-17 

FIGURE B9-2: Tank Vessels Logbook Review Checklist 

VSL NAME: 

_______________________________

VOYAGE # OR DATES: 

______________________________

LOG BOOK #: 

______________________

_____ 46 CFR 31.10-18(a) – TESTS AND INSPECTION OF ALL HAND PORTABLE FIRE EXTINGUISHERS,

SEMIPORTABLE FIRE EXTINGUISHING SYSTEMS AND FIXED FIRE EXTINGUISHING SYSTEMS ONBOARD; 

AT LEAST ONCE EVERY 12 MONTHS 

_____ 46 CFR 35.10-1 – ONBOARD TRAINING, MUSTERS, AND DRILLS HELD IAW SUBCHAP W. ENTRIES 

MUST INCLUDE: 

□ DATE AND TIME OF DRILL, MUSTER OR TRAINING SESSION 

□ SURVIVAL CRAFT AND FIRE-EXTINGUISHING EQUIPMENT USED IN DRILL 

□ IDENTIFICATION OF INOP OR MALFUNCTIONING EQUIPMENT AND CORRECTIVE ACTION

TAKEN 

□ IDENTIFICATION OF CREWMEMBERS PARTICIPATING IN DRILLS OR TRAINING 

□ SUBJECT OF ONBOARD TRAINING SESSION 

□ CIRCUMSTANCES WHY FULL MUSTER, DRILL, OR TRAINING SESSION WAS NOT HELD AND

EXTENT OF MUSTER, DRILL OR TRAINING SESSION

_____ 46 CFR 35.10-15(a) – OPERATION AND INSPECTION OF THE EMERGENCY LIGHTING & POWER 

SYSTEMS; ONCE EACH WEEK WHILE UNDERWAY

_____ 46 CFR 35.10-15(b) – 2 HR OPERATION UNDERLOAD OF THE INTERNAL COMBUSTION ENGINE

DRIVEN EMERGENCY GENERATOR; ONCE EACH MONTH WHILE UNDERWAY

_____ 46 CFR 35.10-15(c) –TESTS OF STORAGE BATTERIES FOR EMERGENCY LIGHTING & POWER 

SYSTEMS; ONCE EACH 6 MONTH PERIOD WHILE UNDERWAY

_____ 46 CFR 35.20-5 – MAXIMUM DRAFT WHEN LEAVING PORT 

_____ 46 CFR 35.20-7(c) – VSL’S STABILITY VERIFIED W/REQUIREMENTS OF TRIM AND STABILITY BOOK, 

STABILTY LTR, COI, AND LOAD LINE CERT. ENTRIES MADE AFTER LOADING, PRIOR TO DEPARTURE & AT 

ALL TIMES NECESSARY TO ENSURE THE SAFETY OF THE VSL

_____ 46 CFR 35.20-10 –TESTS AND EXAMINATION BY SHIP’S OFFICER OF ENTIRE STEERING GEAR, 

WHISTLE, AND MEANS OF COMMS BETWEEN BRIDGE/PILOTHOUSE AND ENGINE ROOM, DATE OF TESTS 

AND CONDITION OF EQUIPEMENT. 

□ VOYAGE > 48 HRS: REQUIRED WITHIN 12 HOURS OF DEPARTURE 

□ VOYAGE < 48 HRS: REQUIRED AT LEAST ONCE PER WEEK

_____ 46 CFR 35.25-10(b) – EACH SUPPLY OF FUEL OIL REC’D O/B, INCLUDING QUANTITY, VENDOR 

NAME, NAME OF OIL PRODUCER, AND THE FLASH POINT 

_____ 46 USC 11301(b) – BELOW LIST IS NOT ALL INCLUSIVE, SEE STATUTE FOR ENTIRE LIST 

□ LEGAL CONVICTION OF SEAMAN & PUNISHMENT

□ OFFENSE COMMITTED BY SEAMAN 

□ STATEMENT OF CONDUCT, CHARACTER, & QUALIFICATIONS OF EACH SEAMAN OR 

STATEMENT THAT MASTER DECLINED TO GIVE OPINION 

□ ILLNESS/INJURY TO SEAMAN, NATURE OF ILLNESS/INJURY & TREATMENT 

□ STATEMENT ABOUT ANY MARINE CASUALTIES AND THE CIRCUMSTANCES UNDER WHICH IT 

OCCURRED 

_____ DISCUSS W/SIO ANY ITEMS WHICH WARRANT INITIATION OF CG ENFORCEMENT ACTION
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 
USCG Marine Safety Manual 

Volume V: Investigations and Enforcement

PART B: INVESTIGATION 

Chapter Ten: 

Boating Accident 

Investigation
 

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 10: BOATING ACCIDENT INVESTIGATION 

B10-i 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

A. LEGAL AUTHORITY ............................ 1

A.1. BOATING ACCIDENTS ARE MARINE CASUALTIES.............................................................................................................1

A.2. BOATING ACCIDENT REPORTING STATUTES ....................................................................................................................1

A.3. BOATING ACCIDENT REPORTING REGULATIONS..............................................................................................................1

B. BOATING ACCIDENT INVESTIGATIONS ............... 1

B.1. STATE INVESTIGATIONS ...................................................................................................................................................1

B.2. COAST GUARD INVESTIGATIONS ......................................................................................................................................2

C. HOW BOATING ACCIDENT INFORMATION IS USED........ 2

C.1. GENERAL..........................................................................................................................................................................2

C.2. BOATING STANDARDS......................................................................................................................................................2

C.2.a. Authority For Standards...........................................................................................................................................2

C.2.b. Development Of Standards.......................................................................................................................................2

C.2.c. Action On Defects.....................................................................................................................................................3

C.2.d. Impact.......................................................................................................................................................................3

C.3. BOATING EDUCATION ......................................................................................................................................................3

C.4. BOATING STATISTICS .......................................................................................................................................................4

C.5. BOATING SAFETY LAW ENFORCEMENT............................................................................................................................4

D. CONDUCT OF BOATING ACCIDENT INVESTIGATIONS ...... 4

D.1. GENERAL .........................................................................................................................................................................4

D.2. SUBMITTING BOATING ACCIDENT REPORT FORMS ..........................................................................................................4

D.3. COMPLETING THE BOATING ACCIDENT REPORT FORM OR CG-3865 ..............................................................................5

D.3.a. Completing the Boating Accident Report Form.......................................................................................................5

D.3.b. Assisting the Person Filling Out the Report.............................................................................................................6

D.3.c. Checking Forms For Completeness.........................................................................................................................6

D.3.d. Transcribing Letter Reports to Form CG-3865 .......................................................................................................6

D.3.e. Sources of Information Not to be Identified .............................................................................................................6

D.4. INVESTIGATIONS AND REPORTS NOT CLASSIFIED AS BOATING ACCIDENTS ...................................................................7

E. ADMINISTRATIVE CORRESPONDENCE CONCERNING BOATING 

ACCIDENTS ..................................... 7

E.1. GENERAL..........................................................................................................................................................................7

E.2. DATA TO BE INCLUDED....................................................................................................................................................7

F. DEFINITIONS ................................ 7

F.1. BOAT ................................................................................................................................................................................7

F.2. BOATING ACCIDENT REPORTING REQUIREMENTS ............................................................................................................8

F.3. CAPSIZING ........................................................................................................................................................................8

F.4. ALLISION/ COLLISION .......................................................................................................................................................8

F.4.a. Allision .....................................................................................................................................................................8

F.4.b. Collision With Floating Object.................................................................................................................................8

F.4.c. Collision With a Vessel.............................................................................................................................................8

F.5. DOCUMENTED...................................................................................................................................................................8
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 10: BOATING ACCIDENT INVESTIGATION 

B10-ii 

F.6. ESTIMATE OF PROPERTY DAMAGE...................................................................................................................................8

F.7. FALLS OVERBOARD ..........................................................................................................................................................8

F.8. FLOODING.........................................................................................................................................................................8

F.9. GROUNDING......................................................................................................................................................................9

F.10. JURISDICTION..................................................................................................................................................................9

F.11. SINKING..........................................................................................................................................................................9

F.12. VESSEL ...........................................................................................................................................................................9

F.12.a. General...................................................................................................................................................................9

F.12.b. Numbered Vessel ....................................................................................................................................................9

F.12.c. Undocumented Vessel.............................................................................................................................................9

F.12.d. United States Vessel ...............................................................................................................................................9
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 10: BOATING ACCIDENT INVESTIGATION 

B10-1 

A.1. BOATING 

ACCIDENTS ARE 

MARINE CASUALTIES

A.2. BOATING 

ACCIDENT REPORTING 

STATUTES

A.3. BOATING 

ACCIDENT REPORTING 

REGULATIONS

B.1. STATE 

INVESTIGATIONS

A. LEGAL AUTHORITY

Under the authority found in 46 USC 6301, the Coast Guard defines the term 

Marine Casualty in 46 CFR Part 4 to include boating accidents. Accordingly, all 

authorities and procedures applicable to the investigation of marine casualties also 

apply to the investigation of boating accidents. 

The statutory requirement to report boating accidents is contained in 46 USC 6101 

and 6102. The implementing regulations, including the content of the reporting form 

and submittal procedures, are in 33 CFR 173-174. In summary, the operator of any 

vessel that is used by its operator for recreational purposes OR that is required to be 

numbered shall submit a casualty or accident report prescribed in 33 CFR 173.57 to 

the reporting authority prescribed in 173.59 when, as a result of an occurrence that 

involves the vessel or its equipment: (1) A person dies; (2) A person is injured and 

requires medical treatment beyond first aid; (3) Damage to vessels and other property 

totals $2,000 or more or there is a complete loss of any vessel; or (4) A person 

disappears from the vessel under circumstances that indicate death or injury. All 

states are required to have a state reporting authority; however, if no state reporting 

authority can be reached, or the incident involves a commercial vessel, the owner or 

operator of the vessel shall report it to the Coast Guard. The report shall be made on 

a state boating accident form or Coast Guard Boating Accident Report, Form CG3865. A civil offense violation for failure to report a boating accident should be 

processed under 46 USC 6103(a). This penalty procedure applies to operators of all 

vessels, with the exception of public vessels. 

Regulatory requirements for casualty reporting are found in 33 CFR173.51-59 and 

174.101-125. Vessels reporting under these regulations are excluded from the 

requirements of 46 CFR 4.05. 

B. BOATING ACCIDENT INVESTIGATIONS

Under a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) between each State reporting authority 

and the Coast Guard, each State agrees to have a State agency receive reports on 

recreational boating accidents that occur on waters subject to the jurisdiction of the 

United States. Further under MOA, the State agency shall investigate fatal accidents 

and when appropriate, non-fatal accidents that result in serious injury. The state 

agency receiving the boating accident report will review it, when appropriate, conduct 

an investigation, make a conclusion as to the cause of the incident, and then forward 

accident and investigation data to the Office of Boating Safety, Commandant (CG5422). Through the Casualty Reporting System, the states shall inform the Coast 

Guard of any boating safety problem areas (e.g., a stability problem with a certain 

type of boat) and specify the problem and measures instituted or recommended. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 10: BOATING ACCIDENT INVESTIGATION 

B10-2 

B.2. COAST GUARD 

INVESTIGATIONS

The OCMI is responsible for the investigation of boating fatalities occurring within 

and beyond the state and territorial waters of the United States for which there is no 

state investigation, and for all boating accidents involving commercial vessels 

which meet the reporting requirements of 46 CFR 4.05 (e.g. State numbered 

uninspected towing vessels and fishing vessels). The District Commander and the 

OCMI also retain the flexibility to conduct an investigation of any boating accident 

when the investigation of such an accident is of particular interest for the 

enhancement of safety or for the public welfare. 

C.1. GENERAL

C.2. BOATING 

STANDARDS

C.2.a. Authority For Standards 

C.2.b. Development Of Standards 

With regard to new boat safety standards, accident data are screened for information 

that may suggest the need for standards in the areas of accident avoidance, accident 

recovery, and program administration. Accident avoidance is concerned with how to 

avoid capsizing, swamping, fire, explosions, or other types of boat casualties.

Accident recovery is oriented towards keeping the boat afloat after an accident, 

The Coast Guard receives boating accident reports from the states and uses the 

information from the reports, as well as additional sources of information such as 

narrative reports, to meet its responsibilities under the provisions codified in 46 USC 

Chapter 43. That responsibility, expressed in its most basic form, is to promote the 

safety of the recreational vessel, its associated equipment, and the operator and 

passengers. The Coast Guard also has a statutory obligation to publish statistics (see 

46 USC 6102). Each year, information received through the casualty reporting 

system is compiled and published in a report entitled "Boating Statistics," 

Commandant Publication (COMDTPUB) P16754 (series). 

C. HOW BOATING ACCIDENT INFORMATION IS USED

The Coast Guard uses information gathered from boating accidents to establish 

regulations and safety standards for boats and associated equipment; implement a 

program designed to identify and remedy boat defects; formulate an effective 

program to educate the recreational boater; update statistical information; determine 

if there is evidence of violation of any law or regulation; and measure the 

effectiveness of safety programs. 

The Federal Boat Safety Act (FBSA) authorized the Coast Guard to establish safety 

standards for boats and associated equipment. These provisions are now included in 

46 USC 4302. In undertaking this responsibility, the Coast Guard has implemented a 

Safety Standards Program. The primary objective of this program is to reduce the 

risk to the consumer from unsafe design and construction of boats and associated 

equipment. Boating accident information is used in this program to develop new 

boat safety standards, monitor compliance with standards, and identify boat defects. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 10: BOATING ACCIDENT INVESTIGATION 

B10-3 

preventing drownings, and using safety equipment, such as signal flares and fire 

extinguishers. Program administration involves such items as the certification of 

boats and display of boat labels. Compliance with standards and determination of 

boat defects are concerned with product assurance; that is, with making sure that the 

boat as manufactured is safe. 

C.2.c. Action On Defects 

Boating accident information is screened for indications of defective boats or boat 

equipment. The nature or incidence of boating accidents, as reflected in casualty 

reports, may provide evidence of manufacturing defects. When a defect is suspected, 

it is researched thoroughly because it may have serious implications for the 

manufacturer. 

C.2.d. Impact 

C.3. BOATING 

EDUCATION

The Boat Safety Standards Check Off List is used by factory inspectors, who are 

contracted by the Coast Guard, to show specific items that should be checked in 

determining compliance with these standards, such as manufacturer's certification, 

safe powering, and ventilation. 

The Coast Guard has the authority to require the manufacturer to notify the original 

purchaser of the defective boat or equipment; notify subsequent purchasers (if 

known to the manufacturer); notify dealers and distributors of such manufacturer to 

whom a boat or associated equipment was delivered; and correct the defect at that 

manufacturer’s sole cost and expense.

The boating standards program has a strong and favorable impact on safe boating. 

Through this program the Coast Guard can take timely, effective action based on 

boating accident investigations. Immediate action can be taken on boat defects 

through the defect notification program. Future action is possible through the 

issuance of a safety standard to prevent the accident from recurring. One important 

reason for conducting boating accident investigations is to monitor the effectiveness 

of, and compliance with, existing standards. 

Although many boating accidents can be attributed to mechanical or environmental 

factors, most are caused by human factors often involving inadequate boating

knowledge and training. To address this problem and minimize accidents due to 

human error, one of the Coast Guard’s goals is to educate the boating public in the 

skills and knowledge necessary for safe vessel operation. A key to achieving this goal 

is the ROI, which is instrumental in identifying the human factors involved in a 

boating accident or casualty. The Coast Guard uses information from ROIs to 

develop educational guides and policies, which are disseminated to boaters directly or 

via other agencies and organizations involved in boating education such as the Coast 

Guard Auxiliary, U.S. Power Squadrons, and state boating authorities. Boating safety 

information reaches the boater through various media including: press releases, 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 10: BOATING ACCIDENT INVESTIGATION 

B10-4 

television, radio, distance learning courses, formal classes, boat shows and convention 

exhibits, and personal appearances before civic groups, conventions, colleges and 

universities, and boating interest groups. 

C.4. BOATING 

STATISTICS

C.5. BOATING 

SAFETY LAW 

ENFORCEMENT

D.1. GENERAL

D.2. SUBMITTING 

BOATING ACCIDENT 

REPORT FORMS

As detailed in 33 CFR 173.59, the boating accident report must be submitted to the 

reporting authority where the accident occurred or, if the accident occurred on the 

high seas, to the state where the vessel number was issued. In some circumstances, 

this will not be possible. If the vessel has no number, the report is submitted to the 

state where the vessel is principally used. If no state reporting authority exists, the 

report should be submitted to the OCMI nearest the place where the accident 

occurred, or nearest the port of first arrival after the accident. 

When the operator has not survived the casualty or is otherwise incapable of 

submitting the casualty or accident report, the owner shall submit the report. The 

report must be in writing, dated upon completion, and signed by the person who 

Boating accident, investigation and narrative data captured by the Boating Accident 

Report Database (BARD-Web) System is a critical component of the statistics 

program. BARD-Web enables all state reporting authorities to electronically transfer 

accident report data and statistical information to one central location. The better the 

quality of boating accident report data received at Coast Guard Headquarters, the 

more valid will be the statistics generated. Narrative information is useful for studies 

that require specific, detailed information. The publication "Boating Statistics," 

COMDTPUB P16754, is the Coast Guard's primary boating statistical report; 

published each year, it has wide public distribution and is available via the CG-5422 

website: www.uscgboating.org. Many other statistical studies are completed using 

data provided by boating accident information sources. 

As with a marine casualty investigation, information gathered about a boating

accident may reveal violations of a law or regulation. In this situation, the case 

should be referred for appropriate enforcement action. If a state conducts the 

investigation, however, and prohibits use of its ROI (or any report made by the 

public) in any action or proceeding against a person, the Coast Guard may only use 

the information provided by the state only in the same way the state may use it. (see 

46 USC 6102(b)). 

D. CONDUCT OF BOATING ACCIDENT INVESTIGATIONS

Under a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA), boating accident investigations shall be 

conducted by the state agency in charge of conducting boating accident 

investigations. If no state agency is available to conduct the investigation, or if the 

incident involves a commercial vessel that results in serious injury, or death, the Coast 

Guard shall perform the investigation in accordance with the procedures and policies 

set forth in Chapter B1 through B7 of this volume. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 10: BOATING ACCIDENT INVESTIGATION 

B10-5 

prepared it. 

D.3. COMPLETING 

THE BOATING 

ACCIDENT REPORT 

FORM OR CG-3865 

D.3.a. Completing the Boating Accident Report Form 

Most states have their own version of the Coast Guard Boating Accident Report 

form CG-3865. The purpose of the form CG-3865 is to provide the states with the 

standard data elements that should be captured for each accident. The following are 

important guidelines when filling out the State Boating Accident Report form or CG3865: 

• Include zip code and phone number for all addresses. If the operator is 

residing at a vacation residence, give both vacation and permanent addresses. 

Specify the permanent mailing address of the owner.

• A borrowed boat is not a rented boat. In such cases, the RENTED BOAT 

block should be checked "No" and indicate the boat is borrowed in the 

accident description area. 

• The number of persons onboard shall include skiers being towed at the time 

of the accident. 

• If the boat is documented, place the official number (O.N.) in the BOAT 

NUMBER block. All boats equipped with propulsion machinery are required 

to be numbered or documented. Ensure that the boat or documentation 

number has not expired. 

• If boat is unnamed, indicate this fact in the BOAT NAME block with 

"N/A." 

• The boat model is usually found on the boat "Certification Label." 

• The Hull Identification Number is a 12-digit number assigned by the 

manufacturer, and is usually permanently affixed to the outboard side of the 

transom. 

• For TYPE OF BOAT, "Other" includes hydroplanes and inflatables. 

• The hull material, type of engine, and length are listed on the Certificate of 

Number. When measuring the length of a boat, do not include the 

bumpkins, motor, or other extensions. 

• Indicate the accident location using known landmarks or latitude/longitude. 

• For weather, ‘fog’ is a condition that greatly reduces visibility, whereas haze 

affects clarity of vision and subdues colors, but does not greatly reduce 

visibility. 

• In several blocks (OPERATION AT TIME OF ACCIDENT; TYPE OF 

ACCIDENT; WHAT, IN YOUR OPINION, CAUSED THE ACCIDENT; 

If in such cases the operator was also the owner, or when neither is capable of 

completing the report, the report may be completed and signed by the IO. If

someone other than the operator completes and signs the report, adequate notation 

must be made on the form as to the reason. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 10: BOATING ACCIDENT INVESTIGATION 

B10-6 

or WATER CONDITIONS) more than one block may be checked (consider 

primary cause and contributing factors or secondary causes). 

• For TYPE OF ACCIDENT, indicate the type of event(s) that occurred. 

• Estimates of the temperature of both the air and water are important in 

determining possible immersion hypothermia. 

D.3.b. Assisting the Person Filling Out the Report 

D.3.c. Checking Forms For Completeness 

D.3.d. Transcribing Letter Reports to Form CG-3865 

D.3.e. Sources of Information Not to be Identified 

• In DAMAGE blocks, include damage as a result of the boat being towed or 

moved after the accident.

The IO may be in a position to assist in completing and forwarding the report, or 

may be required to complete it entirely. The IO should ensure the accuracy of the 

report as prepared by the operator by reviewing and checking the information given 

and, if necessary, correcting wrong information or filling in empty blocks. In making 

such changes, the IO should take care that the information is not obscured and that 

all corrections are initialed. It is also important to attach all necessary amplifying 

information to the report, including the IO and witnesses' statements, photographs, 

blueprints, manufacturer's data, maps or charts, or any other material that may clarify 

information. The IO should ensure that each operator involved in an accident is 

aware of the requirement to submit a boating accident report, and should have the 

necessary forms available. Normally, the report will be submitted by the operator to 

the state. The state will then enter appropriate data into the BARD system and make 

such data available to the Coast Guard within 30 days of receipt of the accident or 

casualty report as prescribed by 33 CFR 174.121.. 

All boating accident report forms and data submitted to the Coast Guard must be 

checked by CG-5422 for completeness, as well as the need for future investigative 

action when there are indications of safety defects or standards violations. 

Reasonable effort should be made to have the report completed before forwarding. 

In this regard, the telephone number of the person making the report can be used to 

verify and/or obtain information. 

When a report is received in letter form, the information should be transcribed onto 

the State Boating Accident Reporting form, or in some cases form CG-3865. The IO 

transcribing the report shall make a notation on the form identifying the source of 

the information and attach any original letter reports. 

Under 46 USC 6102(b), if a person provides information regarding a boating accident 

pursuant to a state law that guarantees against public disclosure of the information, 

the Coast Guard must observe that confidentiality. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 10: BOATING ACCIDENT INVESTIGATION 

B10-7 

D.4.

INVESTIGATIONS AND 

REPORTS NOT 

CLASSIFIED AS 

BOATING ACCIDENTS

E.1. GENERAL

E.2. DATA TO BE 

INCLUDED

When drafting a letter concerning a problem area related to boating standards or 

boating education, convey the following information: 

• Identify the boat and personnel involved; 

• Record the time and location of the accident; 

• Identify the facts surrounding the problem; 

• Identify any evidence of the same problem occurring in other instances; 

• Conclude that it is a manufacturing or education problem, or both; 

• Recommend that the problem be reviewed by boating standards or education 

personnel, or both; and 

• Identify involvement or use of alcohol and/or drugs, if any. 

F.1. BOAT

The Commandant does not require or desire the submittal of reports pertaining to 

marine casualties or accidents unless they fall under the classifications in either 46 

CFR 4.05-1 or 33 CFR 173.55. 

E. ADMINISTRATIVE CORRESPONDENCE CONCERNING BOATING 

ACCIDENTS

Another method of communicating information on boating accidents is through 

administrative correspondence. The information in this section deals with such 

correspondence. An example of a subject commonly treated by administrative 

correspondence is the johnboat. This is a boat of a common type, manufactured by 

several different companies that may have inherent stability problems. An example 

of a broad problem area in boating education is hypothermia. Letters on either 

subject should be addressed to CG-5422. On the other hand, an accident involving a 

specific boat type with a specific defect (e.g., a steering part on a certain 

manufacturer's boat) or a specific boating education problem should be explained in 

the ROI. 

Administrative correspondence as described above cannot serve as a substitute for a 

boating accident report or any other required reports. It is, however, an important 

information source. 

F. DEFINITIONS

Any vessel manufactured or used primarily for noncommercial use, or leased, rented, 

or chartered to another for the latter's noncommercial use; or engaged in the carrying 

of six or fewer passengers. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 10: BOATING ACCIDENT INVESTIGATION 

B10-8 

F.2. BOATING 

ACCIDENT REPORTING 

REQUIREMENTS

A vessel shall report a casualty or accident as required in 33 CFR173.53 and 

33 CFR 173.55 when, as a result of an occurrence that involves the vessel or its 

equipment: 

• Loss of life or disappearance of any person under circumstances that indicate 

the possibility of death or injury; 

• Injury that requires medical treatment beyond first aid; or 

• Damage to the vessel or its equipment, or other vessels, or other property in 

excess of $2,000 or a complete loss of the vessel. 

F.3. CAPSIZING

F.4. ALLISION/

COLLISION

F.4.a. Allision 

F.4.b. Collision With Floating Object 

F.4.c. Collision With a Vessel 

F.5. DOCUMENTED

F.6. ESTIMATE OF 

PROPERTY DAMAGE

F.7. FALLS 

OVERBOARD

F.8. FLOODING

[NOTE: The phrase "medical treatment" is a term in general usage that refers to all 

injuries receiving aid or attention by a physician or another person trained to practice 

or to administer medicine. The accident must involve the vessel or its equipment or 

appurtenances.] 

The overturning or upsetting of a vessel. 

The striking of any fixed object, above or below the surface of the water, except the 

bottom (the striking of reefs, shoals, or rocks on the bottom is considered 

“grounding”). 

The striking of a floating object other than a vessel. Above or below the surface of 

the water, that is not fixed or held in place by any means (e.g., barrels, logs, or other 

flotsam). 

Any striking together of two or more vessels, regardless of operation at the time of 

the accident. This includes colliding with the tow of another vessel, regardless of the 

nature of the tow (e.g., skier, knee-boarder, etc.). 

In receipt of a valid Certificate of Documentation issued in accordance with the 

provisions of 46 USC Chapter 121 and the regulations contained in 46 CFR 67. 

The cost to repair property or restore it to its original condition, which is estimated 

by the owner, operator, or other person in whose opinion, such cost is necessary. 

The unintended spilling out of a person or persons from a vessel without overturning 

the vessel. 

The filling of a vessel with water, regardless of the method of ingress, although the 

vessel retains sufficient buoyancy to remain upon the surface. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 10: BOATING ACCIDENT INVESTIGATION 

B10-9 

F.9. GROUNDING

F.10.

JURISDICTION

F.11. SINKING

F.12. VESSEL F.12.a. General 

F.12.b. Numbered Vessel 

Any undocumented vessel that is numbered by the following: 

• A state with a numbering system approved under 46 USC 12302; or 

F.12.c. Undocumented Vessel 

F.12.d. United States Vessel 

An event in which a vessel runs aground, strikes, or pounds upon rocks, reefs, shoals, 

or the bottom. 

This is the power to act or the power of a particular governmental agency to 

administer and enforce the law. Various states differ on waters over which they 

exercise jurisdiction. If federal and/or state jurisdiction is exercised over a body of 

water, a report of a boating accident is required to be forwarded to the Coast Guard. 

Vessels required to report accidents to a state reporting authority may, on occasion, 

be beyond the jurisdiction of that state. For example, a vessel numbered by a coastal 

state may sail from that state and travel beyond its territorial waters to the high seas. 

In such a case, the requirement to report an accident would not be affected, but the 

state’s authority to investigate would be affected. Such a casualty or accident, when 

the needs of boating safety or law require it to be investigated, may be accomplished 

by the Coast Guard under its statutory authority. Another example would be the use 

of a vessel on a private pond or lake. Jurisdiction may or may not be granted to the 

reporting authority by the laws of that state. However, reports of accidents on such 

waters are included in “Boating Statistics,” COMDTPUB P16754 if the reports 

satisfy the other requirements for inclusion. 

An event in which a vessel loses buoyancy and settles below the surface of the water. 

Includes every description of watercraft or other artificial contrivance used, or 

capable of being used, as a means of transportation on water 

• The Coast Guard, when the state does not have an approved numbering 

system. 

A vessel that does not have and is not required to have a valid Certificate of 

Documentation as a vessel of the United States. 

Any vessel documented or numbered under the laws of the United States. 
 

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 
USCG Marine Safety Manual 

Volume V: Investigations and Enforcement

PART B: INVESTIGATION 

Chapter Eleven: 

Load Line Violation 

Investigation
 

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 
USCG Marine Safety Manual, Volume V: Investigations and Enforcement 

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 11: LOAD LINE VIOLATION INVESTIGATION

B11-i 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

A. COAST GUARD RESPONSIBILITIES FOR LOAD LINE 

ENFORCEMENT ................................... 1

A.1. GENERAL .........................................................................................................................................................................1

A.2. STEPS IN THE INVESTIGATION ..........................................................................................................................................2

A.3. EQUIPMENT NEED TO CONDUCT LOAD LINE INVESTIGATIONS .........................................................................................2

A.5. JURISDICTION ON FOREIGN VESSELS................................................................................................................................3

A.5. PROCESS FOR INVESTIGATION ..........................................................................................................................................3

B. TIMING OF LOAD LINE INVESTIGATIONS ............. 3

B.1. LOADING AND UNLOADING..............................................................................................................................................3

B.2. UPON THE VESSEL’S ARRIVAL .........................................................................................................................................4

B.3. UPON THE VESSEL’S DEPARTURE.....................................................................................................................................4

C. STEP ONE: OBSERVING LOAD LINES FOR SUBMERGENCE .. 5

C.1. GENERAL..........................................................................................................................................................................5

C.2. FRESH WATER ALLOWANCE (FWA)................................................................................................................................5

C.3. FINDING THE “FULL” FWA ..............................................................................................................................................6

C.4. APPLYING THE PORT ALLOWANCE (THE ALLOWABLE FWA) ..........................................................................................6

C.5. BRACKISH WATER ...........................................................................................................................................................7

C.6. COMPUTATIONS OF PORT ALLOWANCES FOR BRACKISH WATER.....................................................................................7

C.7. AVERAGE DENSITIES OF HARBOR WATERS IN PERCENTAGES..........................................................................................7

C.8. STEAMING ALLOWANCES.................................................................................................................................................8

C.9. ACCURATE MEASUREMENT IN WAVES AND SWELLS .......................................................................................................8

C.10. WINTER LOAD LINES .....................................................................................................................................................8

D. STEP TWO: READING DRAFTS .................... 8

D.1. GENERAL .........................................................................................................................................................................8

D.2. HOG, SAG, AND LIST ........................................................................................................................................................8

E. STEP THREE AND FOUR: REVIEWING LOGBOOKS........ 9

E.1. GENERAL..........................................................................................................................................................................9

E.2. EVALUATING LOGBOOK ENTRIES.....................................................................................................................................9

Sample Case 1......................................................................................................................................................................9

Sample Case 2....................................................................................................................................................................10

F. STEP FOUR: EXAMINING THE LOAD LINE CERTIFICATE. 11

F.1. GENERAL........................................................................................................................................................................11

G. STEP FIVE: DOCUMENTING VIOLATIONS ............ 11

G.1. VIOLATIONS DISCOVERED .............................................................................................................................................11

G.2. VIOLATIONS DISCOVERED ABOARD FOREIGN VESSELS .................................................................................................11

G.3. COAST GUARD DATA SYSTEM RECORDS .......................................................................................................................11

H. STEP SIX: TAKING WATER SAMPLES .............. 11
USCG Marine Safety Manual, Volume V: Investigations and Enforcement 

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 11: LOAD LINE VIOLATION INVESTIGATION

B11-ii 

H.1. GENERAL .......................................................................................................................................................................11

FIGURE B11-1: BRACKISH WATER ALLOWANCES (IN INCHES) FOR VARIOUS SPECIFIC GRAVITIES....................................13

FIGURE B11-2: BRACKISH WATER ALLOWANCES (IN INCHES) FOR VARIOUS SPECIFIC GRAVITIES....................................14

FIGURE B11-3: AVERAGE DENSITIES OF HARBOR WATERS, IN PERCENTAGES ...................................................................15
USCG Marine Safety Manual, Volume V: Investigations and Enforcement 

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 11: LOAD LINE VIOLATION INVESTIGATION

B11-1 

A. COAST GUARD RESPONSIBILITIES FOR LOAD LINE 

ENFORCEMENT

A.1. GENERAL Volume IV of this manual contains information on the administration of load line 

laws and regulations. U.S. Customs officers and Coast Guard marine safety 

personnel must observe and verify that vessels comply with 46 USC Chapter 51 

and the regulations in 46 CFR Subchapter E. To do this, personnel must 

determine that the vessel has a valid load line certificate, that load lines are 

conspicuously marked (in accordance with 46 CFR 42.13-40), that draft marks are 

marked forward and aft, and that proper log entries have been made. A foreign or 

U.S. vessel may be checked at any time in U.S. waters to determine whether or not 

the applicable load line has been, is, or will be submerged. Sections of this chapter 

are concerned with how to conduct such an inspection and how to determine 

whether the load line is submerged, or will become submerged. If the applicable 

load line is submerged or other indications of violation of the load line statutes are 

observed, the matter must immediately be reported to the cognizant OCMI for 

investigation. The purpose of such an investigation is to develop sufficient 

evidence to bring proper enforcement action. Specifically, load line investigations 

shall note (and the necessary remedial action shall be determined for): 

• Failure to have load lines on both sides of the vessel (46 CFR 42.07-5); 

• Failure to have load lines conspicuously marked (plainly visible, 

permanently marked, and of the contrasting color) on both sides of the 

vessel (46 CFR 42.13-40); 

• Failure to have a valid Load Line Certificate aboard; (To be valid, even 

though a Load Line Certificate may not have expired, an annual load line 

inspection must have been made within 3 months of the anniversary date 

on the certificate, and so endorsed on the back of the certificate by the 

assigning authority (46 CFR 42.09-15(d).) 

• Failure to enter in the log the positions of the load line marks, port and 

starboard, and the drafts forward and aft upon departure 

(46 CFR 42.07-20); 

• Submergence of applicable load lines at departure or arrival 

(46 CFR 42.07-10); 

• Violation of any order of detention made pursuant to 46 USC Chapter 51; 

and 

• Alteration, defacement, obliteration, or concealment of load lines. 
USCG Marine Safety Manual, Volume V: Investigations and Enforcement 

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 11: LOAD LINE VIOLATION INVESTIGATION

B11-2 

A.2. STEPS IN 

THE INVESTIGATION

IOs generally have seven steps to complete when conducting a load line 

investigation: 

• Step One: The amount of the submergence that exists or will occur shall 

be determined (remember: a picture is worth a thousand words); 

• Step Two: The drafts of the vessel forward and aft shall be checked and 

noted; 

• Step Three: The IO shall ascertain whether or not entries have been 

made in the vessel's log regarding the position of the applicable load line 

marks and the drafts forward and aft for the voyage in question, and make 

notes of such entries; 

• Step Four: The IO shall check whether load line entries have been made 

in the log for several recent voyages and make notes of such entries, 

particularly of variations in drafts, and submergence of load lines; 

• Step Five: Copy the vessel's Load Line Certificate and verify the date of 

issuance, the date of the initial or renewal survey, the date of the most 

recent annual endorsement, if any, and the name of the assigning authority 

that issued the certificate shall be noted; 

• Step Six: Water samples shall be taken and tested.

A.3. EQUIPMENT 

NEED TO CONDUCT 

LOAD LINE 

INVESTIGATIONS

The equipment itemized below is needed to conduct a load line investigation. 

Commanding Officers shall assure that at least one “load line kit” containing this 

equipment is readily available: 

• Current load line regulations (46 CFR, Subchapter E); 

• Two 50-foot tape measures with plumb bobs; 

• A 6-foot folding rule; 

• A notebook;

• Any available job aids; 

• Hydrometers ** 

• Hydrosampler ** 

• Small jars for samples of water, when hydrosamplers are not available; and 

• Gauge glass, 12 inches long, with 4-6 feet of rubber tubing fitted over glass 

(by submerging the tube, almost all wave action can be eliminated). 

• Step Seven: Enter the appropriate Investigation and/or Enforcement 

Activity information in MISLE. 

** NOTE: Items are necessary only when close reading of the position of the 

load line is indicated. 
USCG Marine Safety Manual, Volume V: Investigations and Enforcement 

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 11: LOAD LINE VIOLATION INVESTIGATION

B11-3 

A.5.

JURISDICTION ON 

FOREIGN VESSELS

International Load Line (ICLL 66) Certificates on vessels of foreign countries that 

have ratified the 1966 ICLL are normally accepted as meeting the requirements for 

a U.S. Load Line Certificate and markings in accordance with 46 CFR Subchapter 

E. Vessels of foreign countries that have not ratified the ICLL are subject to U.S. 

laws and regulations and must obtain a Form B Load Line Certificate to operate in 

U.S. waters. If there is a valid Load Line Certificate aboard the vessel, Coast 

Guard inspections are normally limited to that specified in 46 CFR 42.07-60(f) as 

follows: 

• Step One: Assure the ship is not loaded beyond the limits allowed by the 

certificate. 

• Step Two: Assure the position of the load line on the ship corresponds to 

the certificate. [NOTE: It is important to check this as some countries 

allow multiple Load Line Certificates to be issued to a single vessel with 

the master logging which is in use.] 

• Step Three: Assure the ship has not been so materially altered that it is 

manifestly unsafe (46 CFR 42.07-60(f)(1)). 

A.5. PROCESS FOR 

INVESTIGATION

B. TIMING OF LOAD LINE INVESTIGATIONS

B.1. LOADING AND 

UNLOADING

Control of a foreign vessel shall be exercised only to the extent necessary to ensure 

that the ship shall be made fit to proceed to sea safely. This may be interpreted to 

require offloading of cargo or supplies as necessary to return the vessel to its

marks in cases of overloading. 

Load line investigations are civil/criminal offense investigations. Accordingly, IOs 

should perform the fact finding process discussed chapter B3 of this volume, 

along with the violation analysis discussed in chapter B5. IOs may conduct human 

error analysis as described in chapter B4 when they believe such information will 

be of value in considering the appropriate enforcement action. Causal analysis is 

not normally a part of load line investigations. 

Arriving vessels as well as departing vessels are subject to load line checks. Load 

Line rules are not applicable to vessels during loading and unloading operations 

because both the departure and arrival load line checks apply principally for the 

purposes of reserve buoyancy and safety while navigating at sea. If a vessel 

appears to be overloaded based upon the observation of a submerged load line 

while still loading, the Marine Inspector or IO should caution the master of the 

vessel and give the master an opportunity to correct the loading prior to departure. 

Similarly, the arrival check of drafts and marks should be made prior to the start of 

unloading/deballasting operations. If the vessel appears to have been overloaded 

during its voyage, it is essential to obtain the master's explanation of why so that it 

may be checked immediately. For instance, if the Chief Officer explains that liquid 

ballast was added during the voyage in order to improve stability, the IO should 

have all tanks sounded and attach notes to the report on the total ballast present at 

the time of the visit. The IO should also note the drafts recorded in the ship's 
USCG Marine Safety Manual, Volume V: Investigations and Enforcement 

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 11: LOAD LINE VIOLATION INVESTIGATION

B11-4 

B.2. UPON THE 

VESSEL’S ARRIVAL

When an arriving vessel is reported overloaded, the IO must begin the 

investigation immediately. Investigations upon arrival generally follow the 

following steps: 

• Step One: The IO should verify the condition of the ship before 

unloading/deballasting, and must document load line immersion (if any) 

on both sides of the vessel as well as the draft marks at the bow and stern 

(plus the amidships draft, when marked). See Section D.1 below for 

information on reading draft marks. 

• Step Two: The IO should secure the scene of the investigation by 

warning the master not to discharge cargo, ballast, or any other material 

overboard until the investigation is complete. 

• Step Three: The IO should record all tank levels by taking soundings or 

reading ullages in the presence of an appropriate ship’s representative. 

• Step Four: The IO should obtain a minimum of five freeboard readings 

taken at the ends, amidship and quarterpoints along the hull noting the 

longitudinal locations, port and starboard sides, along the length of the 

vessel. [NOTE: Freeboard is the distance from the deck line to the 

approximate mean surface of the water (46 CFR 42.13-20). The mean 

surface of the water is determined by estimating the range of the surface 

waves and taking their midpoint. 

• Step Five: The IO should record cargo amounts and locations and obtain 

the cargo loading plan. 

• Step Six: The IO should check the vessel's logbook to verify the type of 

voyage the vessel was last on, and should verify the position of the load 

line marks in comparison with the Load Line Certificate. 

A maximum amount of accurate and timely data will thus be available to Coast 

Guard authorities taking action on the IO’s report. Experience indicates that the 

information taken by the IO at the time of the violation is most important. If an 

IO fails to check all possibilities, the case may be vulnerable. 

B.3. UPON THE 

VESSEL’S DEPARTURE

logbooks during the last full voyage. 

[NOTE: IOs must fully understand the explanations that a master may offer for 

the alleged overloading, even when a language barrier exists.] 

Upon departure, Investigating Officers (IOs) should wait until loading, ballasting, 

and provisioning of a vessel is completed before recording load line observations. 

If loading is not completed and the vessel is down to its load line marks, the IO 

should advise the Chief Officer and Master of this fact; but the responsibility for 

legal loading rests with the vessel's personnel. [NOTE: A vessel may be legally 

loaded below its marks due to allowable consumables (46 CFR 42.07-10(d)).] IOs 

should record the fact that they gave such advice, with rank and name of the 

officer to whom it was directed in case they have to build an enforcement case or 

detain the vessel. This is applicable to foreign as well as U.S. vessels. 
USCG Marine Safety Manual, Volume V: Investigations and Enforcement 

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 11: LOAD LINE VIOLATION INVESTIGATION

C. STEP ONE: OBSERVING LOAD LINES FOR SUBMERGENCE

C.1. GENERAL The position of the applicable salt water load line (on the Great Lakes, the 

applicable load line) with respect to the surface of the water must be observed on 

both port and starboard sides. As there are generally some waves, half the 

distance between the trough and crest is the approximate mean surface of the 

water. 

C.2. FRESH WATER 

ALLOWANCE (FWA) 

When a vessel is in fresh water, it will carry more draft than if the vessel were in 

salt water due to the density of the water. As described in 46 CFR 42.07-10(d), 

IOs should realize that a vessel departing a fresh water port for sea may legally 

have its load line submerged. When that vessel enters salt water, the vessel’s draft 

will decrease, the freeboard will increase, and the load line will no longer be 

submerged. The opposite is true of a vessel entering port. Due to a decrease in 

salinity, the vessel’s draft will increase and the freeboard will decrease. Such a 

vessel may not have had its load line submerged at sea, but, as buoyant force 

decreases in fresh water, the vessel may gain sufficient draft to submerge its load 

line. To correct for this, IOs must use a “Fresh Water Allowance” (FWA). The 

FWA is nothing more than a set distance (depending on salinity of the water) that 

the IO should “add” to the plimsol mark. FWAs do not apply to vessels on the 

Great Lakes. 

B11-5 
USCG Marine Safety Manual, Volume V: Investigations and Enforcement 

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 11: LOAD LINE VIOLATION INVESTIGATION

B11-6 

C.3. FINDING THE 

“ FULL ” FWA 

To calculate the maximum or “full” fresh water allowance (FWA) (for use if the 

vessel were in pure fresh water), observe the difference between the salt water 

(summer) load line and its corresponding fresh water line (F), as marked on the 

ship. The upper edge of each line corresponds with the applicable required 

freeboard. 

In most cases, the summer salt water line will be applicable. In this case, the fresh 

water line (F) is measured in relation to the summer salt water line(s). 

FWA = (summer) Salt Water Line – Fresh Water Line 

If the tropical salt water line is applicable, the tropical fresh water (TF) line is 

measured in relation to the tropical salt water line (T). 

C.4. APPLYING 

THE PORT ALLOWANCE 

(THE ALLOWABLE 

FWA) 

Unless the vessel is in pure fresh water, the “full” FWA should not be allowed. 

IOs must ascertain how much of the FWA is allowed in a particular port under 

certain environmental conditions. General allowances are provided in figure B-11-

3. However, fluctuations in rainfall such as flooding or drought will alter the 

salinity. In critical cases the water’s specific gravity must be taken. 

For instance, if the full FWA of the ship is 6 inches (calculated) and the port 

allowance for the ship is 2 inches, then the water line of the ship can be legally 

one-third the observed distance from its applicable load line to the fresh water 

mark (i.e., only 1/3 of the full FWA is allowable). 

The full FWA above the winter or winter North Atlantic (WNA) marks would be 

the same as the distance from the summer load line to the fresh water mark. 

Based on the calculations in this section, the IO should be able to state definitely 

whether or not the vessel is overloaded. If the vessel is definitely overloaded 

considering the FWA/port allowance, the position of the water line in relation to 

the load lines and draft marks fore and aft should be recorded. 
USCG Marine Safety Manual, Volume V: Investigations and Enforcement 

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 11: LOAD LINE VIOLATION INVESTIGATION

B11-7 

C.5. BRACKISH 

WATER

C.6.

COMPUTATIONS OF 

PORT ALLOWANCES 

FOR BRACKISH WATER

The standard hydrometer density of ocean water (1.025) less the actual density of 

port water is divided by 0.025; the quotient is then multiplied by the FWA given 

on the vessel's Load Line Certificate. This will give the port allowance to be used. 

No FWA may be granted on the Great Lakes or in the St. Lawrence Seaway from 

Lake Ontario to Montreal for any vessel with a Great Lakes load line. The 

regulations regarding Great Lakes load lines are found in 46 CFR part 45. The 

above procedure, expressed by formula, is: 

(1.025 – Density at Port) x Certificate FWA = Port Allowance 

 0.025 

C.7. AVERAGE 

DENSITIES OF 

HARBOR WATERS IN 

PERCENTAGES

The 1966 ICLL, the 1974 International Convention for Safety of Life at Sea 

(SOLAS), and the regulations implementing 46 USC Chapter 51 allow the 

submergence of load line marks when a vessel is in fresh or brackish water (with 

the exception of load lines on vessels navigating the Great Lakes). Normally, since 

the position of the load lines is observed in port, where often seawater has been 

diluted with fresh water, it is necessary to determine the allowance to account for 

the vessel's rise when passing from brackish water in the port to salt water at sea. 

A vessel departing for sea should be so loaded that, after allowance is made for the 

lesser salinity of the water in which the observation is made, it is floating at the 

load line applicable to the zone or season when it first reaches ocean waters of full 

salinity. The FWA for a particular vessel is obtained from the Load Line 

Certificate and a computation made to determine the FWA to be used.

Figure B11-1 sets forth the brackish water allowance for various specific gravities, 

making it unnecessary to figure each case by this formula.

The percentages of average density of harbor waters indicated in Figure B11-3 are 

for the guidance of IOs when there is no question about a violation of 

46 USC Chapter 51. This table gives average readings, however, and may not be 

accepted in legal action if seriously challenged. Therefore, when there is doubt as 

to the legality of the vessel's loading, and when the IO believes a penalty should be 

imposed, the density of the water should be obtained by hydrometer.
USCG Marine Safety Manual, Volume V: Investigations and Enforcement 

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 11: LOAD LINE VIOLATION INVESTIGATION

B11-8 

C.8. STEAMING 

ALLOWANCES

As discussed in 46 CFR 42.7-10(d), a vessel departing from an (relatively) inland 

port will carry some fuel and other stores that will be consumed between the port 

of departure and the sea. IOs must make allowances for these additional 

consumables when ascertaining whether a vessel’s load line will be submerged 

when it crosses to sea. The steaming allowance ** is computed as follows: estimate 

the total weight of the consumed fuel and stores in long tons (2,240 pounds); from 

the vessel's trim and stability data find the "tons per inch of submersion" or "tons 

per inch immersion (TPI)"; the total weight divided by tons per inch will give the 

inches (or fraction of an inch) that may be allowed.

(Total Weight of Consumables) = Steaming Allowance 

 TPI 

[NOTE: When "tons per inch" is based on short tons of 2,000 pounds, weight 

consumed must be in short tons as well.] 

[NOTE: The best way to estimate the total weight of the consumed fuel/water 

during transit is to review fuel/water consumption records.] 

C.9. ACCURATE 

MEASUREMENT IN 

WAVES AND SWELLS

C.10. WINTER 

LOAD LINES

D. STEP TWO: READING DRAFTS 

D.1. GENERAL The draft of the vessel, forward and aft, must be noted in every case. Commonly, 

for U.S. vessels, the draft mark figures on the hull measure 6 inches in height with 

6 inches between each figure and the bottom of the figure is the even foot reading 

corresponding to the mark. 

** Steaming allowances do not apply to vessels on the Great Lakes. 

Because the penalties found in 46 USC 5116 are based on the economic benefit of 

the overloading, a means must be found to measure accurately the vertical distance 

between troughs and crests of waves, to obtain the position of the applicable load 

line with respect to the water line. For accurate measurement, the gauge 

glass/tubing is the best way to determine the waterline and practically eliminates 

wave action. The specific gravity of the water should also be obtained at the same 

time. 

Under the 1966 International Convention on Load Lines (ICLL), only vessels 328 

feet (100 meters) or less in length are required to have a separate WNA freeboard. 

The minimum freeboard for vessels that are required to be marked with a WNA 

load line, if they are operating in either of the North Atlantic "seasonal winter" 

zones during a winter season, is contained in 46 CFR 42.20-75(d). 

[NOTE: Some vessels may have their draft marks indicated in meters. Typically 

they are subdivided into two tenths of a meter increments.] 

D.2. HOG, SAG,

AND LIST

Determination of the load line position by draft figures alone is not necessarily 

correct, as ships may hog or sag appreciably; load lines are located without 
USCG Marine Safety Manual, Volume V: Investigations and Enforcement 

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 11: LOAD LINE VIOLATION INVESTIGATION

accounting for hogging or sagging. Statutory civil penalties can only be imposed 

for submergence of the load line mark. Aside from possible hogging or sagging, it 

is essential to determine whether or not the applicable load line is or is not 

submerged. If the vessel has a list, an average must be determined for the amount 

of deck rise on one side and depression in the opposite side. 

E. STEP THREE AND FOUR: REVIEWING LOGBOOKS 

E.1. GENERAL

E.2. EVALUATING 

LOGBOOK ENTRIES

Sample Case 1 

Scenario. The examination of the official logbook at the conclusion of a voyage 

shows that a vessel (TPI 51.2, fuel consumption 230 barrels (bbls) per day) 

departed a Gulf of Mexico port approximately 4 inches light (or above) of the load 

line mark for the voyage; that in 3 days the vessel arrived at a nearby foreign port 

within the same load line zone; and that the vessel took on approximately 4,700 

bbls of fuel oil there. The 3 day passage from the domestic port to the foreign 

port consumed approximately 690 bbls of oil at 6.6 bbls per ton. This amounts to 

an approximate 100 ton reduction in displacement; divided by the TPI, this 

translates into an approximate decrease of 2 inches in draft. The 4,700 bbls of fuel 

[NOTE: When loading a vessel, the ship may sometimes be deliberately loaded in 

a hogging condition in order to maximize cargo carrying capacity. 

Upon completion of a voyage in which a vessel apparently was loaded to its marks, 

the vessel's logbook should be examined to determine any instances of 

questionable or doubtful freeboards in possible violation of load line regulations. 

In addition to the checks and examinations of fully laden vessels departing U.S. 

ports that are presently conducted by the National Cargo Bureau (NCB), Customs, 

or Coast Guard personnel, the official logbook of a fully laden vessel that has

bunkered at foreign ports, in possible violation of 46 USC Chapter 51, should be 

examined to determine if further inquiry into the loading and bunkering of the 

vessel is warranted. 

B11-9 
USCG Marine Safety Manual, Volume V: Investigations and Enforcement 

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 11: LOAD LINE VIOLATION INVESTIGATION

oil taken on at 6.6 bbls to the ton and 51.2 tons to the inch translates into a 

decrease in freeboard of approximately 14 inches. The vessel departed the U.S. 

with 4 inches of freeboard to spare, and gained 2 more inches of reduced draft 

proceeding to the foreign port (through burning off fuel oil). When the 6 inch 

draft lightening is subtracted from the 14 inch decrease in freeboard, a possible 

overloading of 8 inches is indicated. This situation warrants further investigation. 

Vessel Data. This case illustrates the need to check the actual freeboard at the 

load line marks, rather than depend on corresponding draft marks to determine 

violations. The subject vessel is a 75,000 deadweight tons (DWT) tanker with the 

following characteristics: 

Analysis. The actual vessel depth is 54' 6", plus 1-3/16" (deck), plus 1-1/4"

(keel), for a total depth of 54' 8-7/16". The corresponding draft for summer 

freeboard is 54' 8-7/16", minus 13' 4-1/2", or 41' 3-15/16". Although it might 

appear that any mean draft less than or equal to 41' 3-15/16" does not constitute a 

violation, this is not true. It is not unusual for a vessel of this size to sag 6 inches. 

If the mean draft of the vessel was determined to be 41' 1" and it had 6 inches of 

sag, there would still be a violation of approximately 3 inches. This would be 

apparent when the load line marks were checked on both sides. Similarly, if the 

vessel were in a hogged condition, a mean draft greater than 41' 3-15/16" would 

not necessarily constitute a violation. The governing factor is always whether the 

actual load line (with the appropriate water density and season corrections) is 

Analysis. There may be a valid explanation in this case. The vessel may 

legitimately have had a quantity of slop water that was discharged during the 

passage; this should be indicated by entries in the engineering logbook or the Oil 

Record Book (ORB). Further interviewing of the master or examination of NCB 

records, including stability and grain loading plans, may explain the situation. If 

the condition is explained satisfactorily, no further action is necessary. Further 

examination of the approved stability grain loading plans of the vessel may indicate 

that the load at the foreign port was in excess of the stated amount of bunkering, 

to eliminate a second bunkering port (which is permitted). Also, the cargo and 

stability plans may have called for the vessel to use evaporators for boiler feed 

from the sea, when in fact the vessel took on a significant quantity of extra fresh 

water just prior to sailing from the U.S.

Sample Case 2 

LENGTH OVERALL 810 ft 

Beam 125 ft 

Molded depth 54 ft. 6 in 

Assigned summer 

freeboard 

13 ft. 4-1/2 in. 

Deck thickness 1-3/16 in. 

Keel thickness 1-1/4 in. 

B11-10
USCG Marine Safety Manual, Volume V: Investigations and Enforcement 

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 11: LOAD LINE VIOLATION INVESTIGATION

B11-11

immersed. 

Need To Check Both Sides Of The Vessel. If the vessel in Sample Case 2 

were boarded at the dock and found to be loaded to its marks on the dock-side, it 

would still be necessary to check the marks on the seaward-side. For a vessel of 

this beam, a list of only 2 degrees causes a height difference of more than 4 feet 

between the sides. If the ship were listing 2 degrees away from the dock, the mean 

freeboard calculations would show a violation of more than 2 feet although none 

was apparent when boarding from the dock side. 

[NOTE: Load line (Plimsoll) marks are placed at the midpoint of the load line 

length of a vessel, as defined in 46 CFR 42.13-15. This is particularly critical for 

measurements taken on vessels with design drag or rake of keel, such as tugboats.]

F. STEP FIVE: EXAMINING THE LOAD LINE CERTIFICATE

F.1. GENERAL The Office of Compliance, Commandant (CG-542) generates policy and guidance 

for the examination of Load Line Certificates. The examination is for the 

purposes of compliance with the certificate. 

G. STEP SIX: DOCUMENTING VIOLATIONS

G.1. VIOLATIONS 

DISCOVERED

If a load line violation is believed to have occurred, MISLE investigation and 

enforcement activities shall be completed and the enforcement activity will be 

submitted to the hearing officer, with appropriate evidence.

G.2. VIOLATIONS 

DISCOVERED ABOARD 

FOREIGN VESSELS

When detention or other intervention is taken against a foreign vessel for load line 

violations, the officer carrying out such action shall make notifications per MSM 

Volume IV, with an additional notification to Customs. Customs notification may 

be made orally. Information on all pertinent circumstances and the action being 

taken should be conveyed in the notification (see 46 CFR 42.07-60).

G.3. COAST GUARD 

DATA SYSTEM 

RECORDS

H. STEP SEVEN: TAKING WATER SAMPLES

H.1. GENERAL

MISLE should be used as an aid in verifying suspected load line violations or in 

identifying known violators. Any vessel involved in a load line discrepancy of 

certificates, freeboard/draft readings, or loading can be regarded as a “vessel of 

particular interest.” Data concerning such vessels shall be entered into MISLE for 

appropriate investigation/enforcement action. 

When IOs believe that enforcement action should be taken, a sample of water 

should be taken amidships by securing a clean bottle to a staff, or with a clean 

hydrosampler. The sample must be taken well away (greater than 10 meters) from 

any active shipboard or shore side discharges, in that these discharges will affect 

the hydrosampler/salinity reading and jeopardize potential enforcement action. In 

the former method, the bottle is stoppered with a clean cork having an attached 
USCG Marine Safety Manual, Volume V: Investigations and Enforcement 

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 11: LOAD LINE VIOLATION INVESTIGATION

B11-12

string, which is held by the operator. When the staff has submerged the bottle to 

about one-half the draft of the vessel, the cork is removed by the string and the 

bottle allowed to fill. The same procedure is used with the hydrosampler by 

securing a rag or tying a knot in the sampler line to obtain the proper depth of 

sample water. The water in the bottle or hydrosampler is then tested with a 

hydrometer at the dock or carried to the office for testing to determine the salinity. 

(See Figures B11-1 and B11-2 for tables of normal salinity allowances applicable to 

selected U.S. ports.) It is not necessary to compensate for differences in the 

temperatures of water when the sample is taken and when the hydrometer was 

read. 
USCG Marine Safety Manual, Volume V: Investigations and Enforcement 

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 11: LOAD LINE VIOLATION INVESTIGATION

Hydrometer 

Reading 2-

1/4 

2-

1/2 

3 3-

1/4 

3- 

3⁄4 

4 

FIGURE B11-1: BRACKISH WATER ALLOWANCES (IN INCHES) FOR VARIOUS SPECIFIC 

GRAVITIES

Fresh Water Allowances Stated on Vessel’s Load Line Certificate 

2 2-

3/4 

3-

1/2 

4-

1/4 

4-

1/2 

4-

3/4 

5 5-

1/4 

5-

1/2 

1.000 2.00 2.25 2.50 2.75 3.00 3.25 3.50 3.75 4.00 4.25 4.50 4.75 5.00 5.25 5.50 

1.001 1.92 2.16 2.40 2.64 2.88 3.12 3.36 3.60 3.84 4.08 4.32 4.56 4.80 5.04 5.28 

1.002 1.84 2.07 2.30 2.53 2.76 2.99 3.22 3.45 3.68 3.91 4.14 4.37 4.60 4.83 5.06 

1.003 1.76 1.98 2.20 2.42 2.64 2.86 3.08 3.30 3.52 3.74 3.96 4.18 4.40 4.62 4.84 

1.004 1.68 1.89 2.10 2.31 2.52 2.73 2.94 3.15 3.36 3.57 3.78 3.99 4.20 4.41 4.62 

1.005 1.60 1.80 2.00 2.20 2.40 2.60 2.80 3.00 3.20 3.40 3.60 3.80 4.00 4.20 4.40 

1.006 1.52 1.71 1.90 2.09 2.28 2.47 2.66 2.85 3.04 3.23 3.42 3.61 3.80 3.99 4.18 

1.007 1.44 1.62 1.80 1.98 2.16 2.34 2.52 2.70 2.88 3.06 3.24 3.42 3.60 3.78 3.96 

1.008 1.36 1.53 1.70 1.87 2.04 2.21 2.38 2.55 2.72 2.89 3.06 3.23 3.40 3.57 3.74 

1.009 1.28 1.44 1.60 1.76 1.92 2.08 2.24 2.40 2.56 2.72 2.88 3.04 3.20 3.36 3.52 

1.010 1.20 1.35 1.50 1.65 1.80 1.95 2.10 2.25 2.40 2.55 2.70 2.85 3.00 3.15 3.30 

1.011 1.12 1.26 1.40 1.54 1.68 1.82 1.96 2.10 2.24 2.38 2.52 2.66 2.80 2.94 3.08 

1.012 1.04 1.17 1.30 1.43 1.56 1.69 1.82 1.95 2.08 2.21 2.34 2.47 2.60 2.73 2.86 

1.013 .96 1.08 1.20 1.32 1.44 1.56 1.68 1.80 1.92 2.04 2.16 2.28 2.40 2.52 2.64 

1.014 .88 .99 1.10 1.21 1.32 1.43 1.54 1.65 1.76 1.87 1.98 2.09 2.20 2.31 2.42 

1.016 .72 .81 .90 .99 1.08 1.17 1.26 1.35 1.44 1.53 1.62 1.71 1.80 1.89 1.98 

1.017 .64 .72 .80 .88 .96 1.04 1.12 1.20 1.28 1.36 1.44 1.52 1.60 1.68 1.76 

1.018 .56 .63 .70 .77 .84 .91 .98 1.05 1.12 1.19 1.26 1.33 1.40 1.47 1.54 

1.019 .48 .54 .60 .66 .72 .78 .84 .90 .96 1.02 1.08 1.14 1.20 1.26 1.32 

1.020 .40 .45 .50 .55 .60 .65 .70 .75 .80 .85 .90 .95 1.00 1.05 1.10 

1.021 .32 .36 .40 .44 .48 .52 .56 .60 .64 .68 .72 .76 .80 .84 .88 

1.022 .24 .27 .30 .33 .36 .39 .42 .45 .48 .51 .54 .57 .60 .63 .66 

1.023 .16 .18 .20 .22 .24 .26 .28 .30 .32 .34 .36 .38 .40 .42 .44 

1.024 .08 .09 .10 .11 .12 .13 .14 .15 .16 .17 .18 .19 .20 .21 .22 

The following table should be used to find the brackish water allowance when the fresh water allowances 

stated on the vessel’s Load Line Certificate range from 2 inches to 5-3/4 inches. Figure B12-2 contains 

brackish water allowances when the fresh water allowance ranges from 6 inches to 9-3/4 inches. 

5-

3/4 

5.75 

5.52 

5.29 

5.06 

4.83 

4.60 

4.37 

4.14 

3.91 

3.68 

3.45 

3.22 

2.99 

2.76 

2.53 

2.07 

1.84 

1.61 

1.38 

1.15 

.92 

.69 

.46 

.23 

B11-13
USCG Marine Safety Manual, Volume V: Investigations and Enforcement 

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 11: LOAD LINE VIOLATION INVESTIGATION

B11-14

FIGURE B11-2: BRACKISH WATER ALLOWANCES (IN INCHES) FOR VARIOUS SPECIFIC 

GRAVITIES

The following table should be used to find the brackish water allowance when the fresh water allowances 

stated on the vessel’s load line certificate range from 6 inches to 9-3/4 inches. Figure B12-1 contains 

brackish water allowances when the fresh water allowance ranges from 2 inches to 5-3/4 inches. 

Hydrometer 

Reading

Fresh Water Allowances Stated on Vessel’s Load Line Certificate 

6 6-

1/4 

6-

1/2 

6-

3/4 

7 7-

1/4 

7-

1/2 

7-

3/4 

8 8-

1/4 

8-

1/2 

8-

3/4 

9 9-

1/4 

9-

1/2 

1.000 6.00 6.25 6.50 6.75 7.00 7.25 7.50 7.75 8.00 8.25 8.50 8.75 9.00 9.25 9.50 

1.001 5.76 6.00 6.24 6.48 6.72 6.96 7.20 7.44 7.68 7.92 8.16 8.40 8.64 8.88 9.12 

1.002 5.52 5.75 5.98 6.21 6.44 6.67 6.90 7.13 7.36 7.59 7.82 8.05 8.28 8.51 8.74 

1.003 5.28 5.50 5.72 5.94 6.16 6.38 6.60 6.82 7.04 7.26 7.48 7.70 7.92 8.14 8.36 

1.004 5.04 5.25 5.46 5.67 5.88 6.09 6.30 6.51 6.72 6.93 7.14 7.35 7.56 7.77 7.98 

1.005 4.80 5.00 5.20 5.40 5.60 5.80 6.00 6.20 6.40 6.60 6.80 7.00 7.20 7.40 7.60 

1.006 4.56 4.75 4.94 5.13 5.32 5.51 5.70 5.89 6.08 6.27 6.46 6.65 6.84 7.03 7.22 

1.007 4.32 4.50 4.68 4.86 5.04 5.22 5.40 5.58 5.76 5.94 6.12 6.30 6.48 6.66 6.84 

1.008 4.08 4.25 4.42 4.59 4.76 4.93 5.10 5.27 5.44 5.61 5.78 5.95 6.12 6.29 6.46 

1009 3.84 4.00 4.16 4.32 4.48 4.64 4.80 4.96 5.12 5.28 5.44 5.60 5.76 5.92 6.08 

1.010 3.60 3.75 3.90 4.05 4.20 4.35 4.50 4.65 4.80 4.95 5.10 5.25 5.40 5.55 5.70 

1.011 3.36 3.50 3.64 3.78 3.92 4.06 4.20 4.34 4.48 4.62 4.76 4.90 5.04 5.18 5.32 

1.012 3.12 3.25 3.38 3.51 3.64 3.77 3.90 4.03 4.16 4.29 4.42 4.55 4.68 4.81 4.94 

1.013 2.88 3.00 3.02 3.24 3.36 3.48 3.60 3.72 3.84 3.96 4.08 4.20 4.32 4.44 4.56 

1.014 2.64 2.75 2.86 2.97 3.08 3.19 3.30 3.41 3.52 3.63 3.74 3.85 3.96 4.07 4.18 

1.015 2.40 2.50 2.60 2.70 2.80 2.90 3.00 3.10 3.20 3.30 3.40 3.50 3.60 3.70 3.80 

1.016 2.16 2.25 2.34 2.43 2.52 2.61 2.70 2.79 2.88 2.97 3.06 3.15 3.24 3.33 3.42 

1.017 1.92 2.00 2.08 2.16 2.24 2.32 2.40 2.48 2.56 2.64 2.72 2.80 2.88 2.96 3.04 

1.018 1.68 1.75 1.82 1.89 1.96 2.03 2.10 2.17 2.24 2.31 2.38 2.45 2.52 2.59 2.66 

1.019 1.44 1.50 1.56 1.62 1.68 1.74 1.80 1.86 1.92 1.98 2.04 2.10 2.16 2.22 2.28 

1.020 1.20 1.25 1.30 1.35 1.40 1.45 1.50 1.55 1.60 1.65 1.70 1.75 1.80 1.85 1.90 

1.021 .96 1.00 1.04 1.08 1.12 1.16 1.20 1.24 1.28 1.32 1.36 1.40 1.44 1.48 1.52 

1.022 .72 .75 .78 .81 .84 .87 .90 .93 .96 .99 1.02 1.05 1.08 1.11 1.14 

1.023 .48 .50 .52 .54 .56 .58 .60 .62 .64 .66 .68 .70 .72 .74 .76 

1.024. 24. 25 .26 .27 .28 .29 .30 .31 .32 .33 .34 .35 .36 .37 .38 

9-

3/4 

9.75 

9.36 

8.97 

8.58 

8.19 

7.80 

7.41 

7.02 

6.63 

6.24 

5.85 

5.46 

5.07 

4.68 

4.29 

3.90 

3.51 

3.12 

2.73 

2.34 

1.95 

1.56 

1.17 

.78 

.39 
USCG Marine Safety Manual, Volume V: Investigations and Enforcement 

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 11: LOAD LINE VIOLATION INVESTIGATION

B11-15

FIGURE B11-3: AVERAGE DENSITIES OF HARBOR WATERS, IN PERCENTAGES

Port Percentage of Freshwater 

Allowance

Port Percentage of Freshwater 

Allowance

Aberdeen, Wash 100 New York, N.Y.-Cont. 

Astoria, Orge 100 Newark, N.J. 50 

Baltimore, MD 100 North River 

Bath, Maine Pier 9 

High tide 

Low tide 30 

Beaumont, Tex 100 

Bellingham, Wash 20 

Boston, Mass 

High tide 

Low tide 

None 

5 

High tide 

Low tide 

45 

Brunswick, Ga None Pier 97: 

Low tide 

50 

40 

Charleston, SC None 

Eastport, Maine None 

Everett, Wash 20 Perth Amboy, NJ 

High tide 

Low tide 40 

Fall River, Mass 100 

Galveston, Tex None 

Gulfport, Miss None Staten Island 30 

Honolulu, T.H. Norfolk, Va 60 

Houston, Tex Olympia, Wash 20 

Jacksonville, Fl Panama City, Fla None 

Ketchikan, Alaska Pensacola, Fla 50 

Key West, Fla Philadelphia, Pa 100 

Lake Charles, La Port Arthur, Tex 100 

Longview, Wash Portland, Maine None 

Los Angeles, Calif Portland, Oreg. 100 

Marshfield, Orge 

Rainy season 

Dry season 20 

Port Townsend, Wash None 

Providence, RI None 

St. Croix, V.I. None 

St. Thomas, V.I. None 

Coo's Bay Lumber Co. 

Rainy season 

Dry season 45 

San Diego, Calif. None 

San Francisco, Calif 

Martinez:

January to July 30 

Coo's Bay 69 Terminal Co 

dock: 

Rainy season 

Dry season 45 

Oakland: 

Part Terminal: 

January to July 20 

Empire Mill 10 dock: 

Rainy season 

Dry season 

20 

None January to July

July to January

30 

Marshfield: 

Rainy season 55 

45 January to July

July to January

30 

Oregon Pacific dock: 

Rainy season 40 

20 January to July

July to January

20 

Port dock: 

Rainy season 40 

20 January to July

July to January

30 

Sitka Spruce dock: 

Rainy season None 

None Streets: 

January to July

July to January

30 

10 

None 

Miami, Fla None 

Mobile, Ala Parr Terminal 

(Outer Harbor): 

January to July

July to January

25 

15 

100 

60 

New York, NY 

Brooklyn: 

Pier 4 

Pier 33 30 

San Juan, P.R. None 

Savannah, Ga 100 

Seattle, Wash 20 

East River (New York):

30 

Tacoma, Wash 20 

Tampa, Fla (no fixed - allowance too variable) 

Jersey City, NJ

High tide 

Low tide 35 

Wilmington, Del 100 

Wilmington, NC 100 

100 

40 

Pier 61 

30 

High tide 

25 

None 

100 

100 

None 

None 

100 

100 

None 

Coo's Bay logging dock 

40 

dock: 

55 

July to January

55 

July to January

Pier 11: 

10 

Dry season 

Pier 26: 

10 

Dry season 

Pier 45: 

10 

Dry season 

Pier 50: 

10 

Dry season 

Third and Channel 

Mayaguez, P.R. 

80 

New Orleans, La 

Newport News, Va

30 

Pier 14 

40 
 

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
USCG Marine Safety Manual 

Volume V: Investigations and Enforcement

PART B: INVESTIGATION 

Chapter Twelve: 

Offshore Incident 

Investigation 
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 12: OFFSHORE INCIDENT INVESTIGATION 

B12-i 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

A. OFFSHORE ACTIVITIES ......................... 1

A.1. GENERAL .........................................................................................................................................................................1

A.2. DEFINITIONS ....................................................................................................................................................................1

A.2.a. The OCS ...................................................................................................................................................................1

A.2.b. Offshore Activities....................................................................................................................................................1

A.2.c. Oil and Gas Exploration...........................................................................................................................................1

A.2.d. Mobile Offshore Drilling Unit (MODU) ..................................................................................................................1

A.2.e. Offshore Supply Vessel (OSV) ..................................................................................................................................1

A.2.f. Other Support Vessel.................................................................................................................................................2

A.2.g. Fixed Platform..........................................................................................................................................................2

A.2.h. Floating Production (and Storage) System ..............................................................................................................2

A.2.i. Tension Leg Platform................................................................................................................................................2

A.2.j. Spar Platform ............................................................................................................................................................2

A.3. COAST GUARD RESPONSIBILITIES....................................................................................................................................2

A.3.a. Under OCSLAA........................................................................................................................................................2

B. RELATIONSHIP TO MINERALS MANAGEMENT SERVICE (MMS) 3

B.1. GENERAL..........................................................................................................................................................................3

B.2. INVESTIGATIVE LEAD.......................................................................................................................................................3

B.2.a. Coast Guard as Investigative Lead ..........................................................................................................................3

B.2.b. MMS as Investigative Lead ......................................................................................................................................4

B.2.c. Report of Investigation (ROI)...................................................................................................................................4

B.2.d. Joint Investigations...................................................................................................................................................4

C. RELATIONSHIP TO THE OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH 

ADMINISTRATION (OSHA) ........................... 4

C.1. GENERAL..........................................................................................................................................................................4

C.2. INVESTIGATIVE ACTIVITIES..............................................................................................................................................5

C.3. REVIEW OF ALLEGED VIOLATIONS ..................................................................................................................................5

C.4. RESOLUTION OF COMPLAINTS FROM MERCHANT MARINERS ..........................................................................................5
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 12: OFFSHORE INCIDENT INVESTIGATION 

B12-1 

A. OFFSHORE ACTIVITIES

A.1. GENERAL The regulations for Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) investigations are found in 

33 CFR 140.201 through 205. Section 22 of the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act 

Amendments (OCSLAA) (43 USC 1348) requires the investigation of every death, 

serious injury, major fire, pollution incident, and alleged violation of safety regulations 

issued pursuant to the OCSLAA that occurs as a result of activities on the OCS 

(including foreign activities). 

A.2. DEFINITIONS A.2.a. The OCS 

All submerged lands lying seaward and outside of the area of ‘‘lands beneath

navigable waters’’ as defined in the Submerged Lands Act (43 USC 1301(a)) and of 

which the subsoil and seabed appertain to the United States and are subject to its 

jurisdiction and control. 

A.2.b. Offshore Activities 

Any offshore activity associated with exploration for, or development or production 

of, the minerals of the OCS. 

A.2.c. Oil and Gas Exploration 

The process of searching for minerals (oil, gas, sulphur, geopressured-geothermal and 

associated resources, and all other minerals) which are authorized by an Act of 

Congress to be produced from “public lands” as defined in section 103 of the Federal 

Lands Policy and Management Act of 1976 (43 USC 1702(e)) including, but not 

limited to: 

• geophysical surveys where magnetic, gravity, seismic, or other systems are 

used to detect or imply the presence of such minerals; 

• any drilling, whether on or off known geological structures, including the 

drilling of a well in which a discovery of oil or natural gas in paying quantities 

is made; and 

• the drilling of any additional delineation well after the discovery that is needed 

to delineate any reservoir and to enable the lessee to determine whether to 

proceed with development and production. 

A.2.d. Mobile Offshore Drilling Unit (MODU) 

A vessel, other than a public vessel of the United States, capable of engaging in 

drilling operations for exploration or exploitation of subsea resources. 

A.2.e. Offshore Supply Vessel (OSV) 

A vessel that: 

• is propelled by machinery other than steam; 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 12: OFFSHORE INCIDENT INVESTIGATION 

B12-2 

• does not meet the definition of a passenger-carrying vessel in 

46 USC 2101(22) or 46 USC 2101(35); 

• is more than 15 but less than 500 gross tons (as measured under the Standard, 

Dual, or Simplified Measurement System under 46 CFR part 69, subpart C, 

D, or E) or is less than 6,000 gross tons (as measured under the Convention 

Measurement System under part 69, subpart B); and 

• regularly carries goods, supplies, individuals in addition to the crew, or 

equipment in support of exploration, exploitation, or production of offshore 

mineral or energy resources. 

A.2.f. Other Support Vessel 

A vessel which is moored close to and readily accessible from an OCS facility for the 

purpose of providing power, fuel, or other services to the operation being conducted 

on the facility. A ‘standby vessel’ means a vessel meeting the requirements of 33 CFR 

Part 143, Subpart E, and specifically designated in an Emergency Evacuation Plan 

under 33 CFR 146.140 or 146.210 to provide rapid evacuation assistance in the event 

of an emergency. 

A.2.g. Fixed Platform 

A bottom founded OCS facility permanently attached to the seabed or subsoil of the 

OCS, including platforms, guyed towers, articulated gravity platforms, etc. 

A.2.h. Floating Production (and Storage) System 

A buoyant OCS facility securely and substantially moored so that it cannot be moved 

without a special effort. This term includes tension leg platforms and permanently 

moored semi-submersibles or shipshape hulls but does not include MODUs and 

other vessels. 

A.2.i. Tension Leg Platform 

Floating structure whose mooring system is constituted by vertical tethers. This 

characteristic makes the structure very rigid in the vertical direction and very flexible 

in the horizontal plane. The vertical rigidity helps to tie in wells for production, 

while; the horizontal compliance makes the platform insensitive to the primary effect 

of waves. 

A.2.j. Spar Platform 

A cylinder shaped platform with a deep draft that can be used as production 

platforms. 

A.3. COAST GUARD 

RESPONSIBILITIES

33 CFR 140.203 

A.3.a. Under OCSLAA 

Under the direction of the OCMI, IOs will investigate the following incidents 

occurring as a result of OCS activities: 

• Death; 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 12: OFFSHORE INCIDENT INVESTIGATION 

B12-3 

• Injury resulting in substantial impairment of any bodily unit or function; 

• Fire which causes death, serious injury or property damage exceeding 

$25,000; 

• Oil spillage exceeding two hundred barrels of oil in one occurrence during a 

thirty-day period; and 

• Other injuries, casualties, accidents, complaints of unsafe working conditions, 

fires, pollution, and incidents occurring as a result of OCS activities as the 

OCMI, deems necessary to promote the safety of life or property or protect 

the marine environment. 

B. RELATIONSHIP TO MINERALS MANAGEMENT SERVICE (MMS) 

B.1. GENERAL Insofar as practicable, OCS investigations shall be conducted pursuant to the 

procedures outlined in 46 CFR part 4. Representatives of the U.S. Department of the 

Interior (DOI) MMS may participate in OCS investigations. Such participation 

includes, but is not limited to the following: 

• Participating in a joint on-scene investigation; 

• Making recommendations concerning the scope of the investigation; 

• Calling and examining witnesses; and 

• Submitting and requesting additional evidence. 

B.2.

INVESTIGATIVE LEAD

To avoid duplicative efforts and to simplify administrative procedures, the primary 

agency regulating a particular facility, system, or operation shall be responsible for 

leading the investigation and for reporting on incidents involving that facility, system, 

or operation. Where only one agency has an investigative interest in an incident, that 

agency will investigate and report. Where both the Coast Guard and MMS have 

investigative interest, one will assume the lead role while the other provides 

supporting participation (see Volume X of this manual for the memorandum of 

understanding (MOU) between the Coast Guard and MMS). Assumption of lead 

agency responsibility, the extent of supporting participation, and procedures for 

coordination will be determined by the circumstances of the incident. 

B.2.a. Coast Guard as Investigative Lead 

The Coast Guard is the lead agency for incidents involving: 

• Collisions; 

• Deaths And Injuries. The Coast Guard is the lead agency. MMS 

participation will be requested in all investigations of deaths and injuries 

associated with oil or gas drilling or production operations or equipment, 

including exposure to hydrogen sulfide; and 

• Facilities, Equipment, and Materials. The Coast Guard will normally be the 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 12: OFFSHORE INCIDENT INVESTIGATION 

B12-4 

lead agency for incidents involving damage to MODUs, mobile well servicing 

units (MWSUs), or other vessels, or floating OCS facilities, and failure of or 

damage to propulsion, auxiliary, or emergency systems and equipment for 

which the Coast Guard establishes requirements. 

See 33 CFR 140.201 through 205. 

B.2.b. MMS as Investigative Lead 

MMS will normally be the lead agency for all other incidents involving failure of or 

damage to fixed OCS facilities to specifically include: 

• Fires And Explosions. MMS is the lead agency for all fires and explosions 

that involve drilling or production operations. Coast Guard participation will 

be requested in all investigations of fires and explosions involving deaths, 

injuries, and vessels, equipment, or operations for which the Coast Guard is 

responsible; and 

• Pollution Incidents. MMS is the lead agency. Coast Guard participation will 

be requested in all pollution investigations. 

B.2.c. Report of Investigation (ROI) 

The lead agency for an investigation shall conduct, review, approve, and release its 

ROI in accordance with its normal procedures; comments by the supporting agency 

will be included in the ROI. ROIs shall be made available to parties to the 

investigation and the public upon final agency action conducted in accordance with 

the investigative procedures outlined in 33 CFR 140.203. If both agencies participate 

in the investigation, the lead agency shall forward an information copy of its final 

ROI to the supporting agency. ROIs prepared by a single agency need not be 

forwarded routinely to the other, but shall be available upon request. 

See 33 CFR 140.201 through 205. 

B.2.d. Joint Investigations 

In such investigations, the IO shall have the power to administer necessary oaths, 

subpoena witnesses, and require the production of books, logs, documents, and other 

forms of evidence. See 33 CFR 140.201 through 205. 

C. RELATIONSHIP TO THE OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH 

ADMINISTRATION (OSHA) 

C.1. GENERAL An MOU between the Coast Guard and OSHA, dated 19 December 1979, provides 

for cooperation between the two agencies in identifying violations of safety and 

health regulations that have caused or may cause injuries or deaths during activities 

conducted pursuant to the OCSLAA. Specifically, Paragraph IV.A.2 provides that 

the Coast Guard will review allegations from any person of violations of health or 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART B: INVESTIGATION

CHAPTER 12: OFFSHORE INCIDENT INVESTIGATION 

B12-5 

safety regulations or other unsafe working conditions. 

C.2.

INVESTIGATIVE 

ACTIVITIES

In the course of OCS investigations, whether formal or informal, the Coast Guard 

will cooperate with OSHA with respect to identifying violations of applicable OSHA 

regulations related to the casualty or incident. Such cooperation will include the 

following: 

• Promptly making investigative information available to OSHA; 

• Inviting OSHA attendance at Coast Guard formal hearings; and 

• Developing lines of inquiry suggested by OSHA. 

When a Coast Guard incident investigation identifies an alleged violation of OSHA 

regulations, the OCMI shall promptly notify OSHA and shall cooperate with OSHA 

with respect to any enforcement action that the agency may undertake. Such 

cooperation may include, but is not limited to, providing transportation as available. 

C.3. REVIEW OF 

ALLEGED VIOLATIONS

The Coast Guard will review any allegation of a violation of OSHA regulations or the 

existence of unsafe working conditions on the OCS, and will take appropriate action 

under the circumstances. Copies of complaints or allegations received by OSHA will 

be referred to the appropriate Coast Guard District Commander for resolution. The 

Coast Guard shall notify OSHA as promptly as possible of the disposition of 

allegations forwarded by OSHA. 

C.4. RESOLUTION 

OF COMPLAINTS FROM 

MERCHANT MARINERS

In an MOU dated 8 March 1983, OSHA concluded that it may not enforce the 

Occupational Safety and Health Act with respect to the working conditions aboard 

Coast Guard inspected vessels. OSHA retains its authority under Section 11(c) of the 

Act, which forbids discrimination in any manner against employees who have 

exercised any right afforded them under the Act. OSHA agreed to refer to the Coast 

Guard any complaints (except for Section 11(c) complaints) received from mariners 

working aboard inspected vessels. The Coast Guard has the sole discretion to 

determine whether the events complained of constitute hazardous conditions, as well 

as the extent of any remedial actions. 
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 
USCG Marine Safety Manual 

Volume V: Investigations and Enforcement

PART C: ENFORCEMENT 

Chapter One: 

Enforcement
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 1: ENFORCEMENT

C1-i 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

A. ENFORCEMENT PERSPECTIVE AND SCOPE .............. 1

A.1. PERSPECTIVE....................................................................................................................................................................1

A.2. SCOPE ..............................................................................................................................................................................1

B. ENFORCEMENT OBJECTIVES AND PRINCIPLES........... 1

B.1. GENERAL..........................................................................................................................................................................1

B.2. ENFORCEMENT OBJECTIVES.............................................................................................................................................1

B.2.a. Documentation .........................................................................................................................................................1

B.2.b. Measurement ............................................................................................................................................................2

B.3. BASIS FOR ENFORCEMENT ACTION ..................................................................................................................................2

B.3.a. Required Steps to Initiate Enforcement Action.........................................................................................................2

B.3.b. Enforcement Stance..................................................................................................................................................2

B.3.c. Selecting the Appropriate Enforcement Action(s) ....................................................................................................3

C. RELATIVE RANKING OF ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS......... 3

C.1. NO-CONSEQUENCE RECOMMENDATION...........................................................................................................................3

C.2. COMPLIANCE REQUIREMENTS..........................................................................................................................................3

C.3. WARNINGS .......................................................................................................................................................................4

C.4. REFERRAL FOR OTHER AGENCY ENFORCEMENT..............................................................................................................4

C.5. NOTICE OF VIOLATION (A.K.A. TICKETS) .........................................................................................................................4

C.6. CLASS I ADMINISTRATIVE CIVIL PENALTIES....................................................................................................................4

C.7. SUSPENSION AND REVOCATION........................................................................................................................................4

C.8. CLASS II ADMINISTRATIVE CIVIL PENALTIES...................................................................................................................4

C.9. CERTIFICATE OR PERMIT REVOCATION ............................................................................................................................5

C.10. REFERRAL FOR JUDICIAL PROSECUTION.........................................................................................................................5

C.10.a. Judicial Civil Penalties ..........................................................................................................................................5

C.11. CRIMINAL ENFORCEMENT..............................................................................................................................................5

C.12. OPERATIONAL CONTROLS ..............................................................................................................................................5

D. ENFORCEMENT POLICY .......................... 6

D.1. MULTIPLE SIMULTANEOUS ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS.......................................................................................................6

D.2. SELECTING THE APPROPRIATE CIVIL PENALTY RECOMMENDATION ................................................................................6

D.2.a. The Economic Benefit to the Offender from the Offense..........................................................................................6

D.2.b. The Nature of the Offense ........................................................................................................................................6

D.2.c. The circumstances of the offense..............................................................................................................................6

D.2.d. The Extent of the Offense(s).....................................................................................................................................6

D.2.e. The Gravity of the Prohibited Acts...........................................................................................................................7

D.2.f. The Degree of Culpability/Responsibility .................................................................................................................7

D.2.g. The Violation History of the Offender......................................................................................................................7

D.2.h. The Degree of Cooperation......................................................................................................................................7

D.2.i. Warnings for Oil Discharge Offenses.......................................................................................................................7

D.2.j. Other Penalties.........................................................................................................................................................8

D.2.k. Other Matters that Justice Requires.........................................................................................................................8

D.3. OFFENSE CATEGORIES .....................................................................................................................................................8

D.3.a. Category A Offenses.................................................................................................................................................8

D.3.b. Category B Offenses.................................................................................................................................................8

D.3.c. Category C Offenses.................................................................................................................................................8
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 1: ENFORCEMENT

C1-ii 

D.3.d. Category D Offenses................................................................................................................................................8

E. ON-SCENE ENFORCEMENT OPTIONS AND RESPONSIBILITIES 8

E.1. SELECTING AN APPROPRIATE ENFORCEMENT OPTION......................................................................................................8

F. UNIT ENFORCEMENT OPTIONS AND RESPONSIBILITIES .... 9

F.1. REVIEW OF ON-SCENE ENFORCEMENT DECISIONS ...........................................................................................................9

F.2. INITIATING UNIT ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS .....................................................................................................................10

F.3. REFERRAL TO OTHER AGENCY FOR ENFORCEMENT ACTION ..........................................................................................10

G. DISTRICT ENFORCEMENT OPTIONS AND RESPONSIBILITIES 10

G.1. REVIEW OF UNIT ENFORCEMENT DECISIONS .................................................................................................................10

G.2. ACTION ON UNIT ENFORCEMENT REFERRALS................................................................................................................11

H. COMMANDANT ENFORCEMENT RESPONSIBILITIES ........ 11

H.1. GENERAL .......................................................................................................................................................................11

I. INTRA-GOVERNMENTAL AND INTERNATIONAL ENFORCEMENT 

COORDINATION.................................. 12

I.1. INTRA-GOVERNMENTAL ENFORCEMENT COORDINATION ................................................................................................12

I.1.a. U. S. Government Agencies.....................................................................................................................................12

I.1.a.1. Customs Service Holds On Vessels...................................................................................................................12

I.1.a.2. Department Of Justice Assistance ....................................................................................................................13

I.1.b. State Governments...................................................................................................................................................13

I.2. INTERNATIONAL ENFORCEMENT COORDINATION............................................................................................................14

I.2.a. General....................................................................................................................................................................14

I.2.b. Detention Reporting And Deficiency Referrals .......................................................................................................14
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 1: ENFORCEMENT

C1-1 

A.1. PERSPECTIVE

A.2. SCOPE

B.1. GENERAL

B.2. ENFORCEMENT 

OBJECTIVES

B.2.a. Documentation 

A. ENFORCEMENT PERSPECTIVE AND SCOPE

The guidance provided by this Part of this Volume modifies and replaces policy 

previously located in Volume I of the Marine Safety Manual. This policy signals a 

strong Coast Guard national law enforcement posture and requires the initiation of 

appropriate enforcement actions that serve to minimize the risk to people, property, 

and the marine environment. For all situations where prima facie evidence of a 

violation exists, administrative, judicial, and/or criminal enforcement actions should 

be initiated, regardless of how the violation is discovered (i.e., through a port safety 

boarding, a marine inspection, a marine investigation, or other activity). For instances 

involving civil violations, enforcement actions should range from issuance of a Letter 

of Warning for a minor, first time violation which is immediately corrected, to the 

initiation of civil violation cases. 

This chapter provides an overview of marine safety and environmental protection law 

enforcement. It defines enforcement from a system’s perspective and establishes 

overall enforcement principles. Furthermore, this chapter categorizes enforcement 

options and provides policy thresholds for initiating various enforcement options. 

This chapter should be consulted after the completion of an investigation, 

compliance activity, or other marine safety detection activities in accordance with B.3. 

below.

B. ENFORCEMENT OBJECTIVES AND PRINCIPLES

Law enforcement is the next logical step beyond educational efforts and regulatory 

controls imposed to minimize maritime risks. 

Marine safety law enforcement supports the overall goals of the Marine Safety 

Program to promote the safety of life and property at sea and protect the marine 

environment. Marine safety law enforcement actions are intended to correct 

deficiencies, deter future noncompliance, and minimize risks to persons, property, or 

the marine environment. 

Enforcement actions should be formally documented and communicated both 

externally (i.e., deficiency or violation notifications, letters, incident reports, etc.) to 

the involved parties and internally within the Coast Guard (i.e., messages, MISLE 

reports, etc.) as required. Meeting enforcement objectives depends in large part on 

informed targeting and prioritization of activities. This, in turn, is dependent upon 

proper documentation of enforcement actions within the Marine Information for 

Safety and Law Enforcement (MISLE) system and access at all levels of the Coast 

Guard organization. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 1: ENFORCEMENT

B.2.b. Measurement 

B.3. BASIS FOR 

ENFORCEMENT ACTION

B.3.a. Required Steps to Initiate Enforcement Action 

 Step 1 Step 2 Step 3 

 Step 4 Step 5 Step 6 

B.3.b. Enforcement Stance 

Marine safety personnel, units, district and area commanders shall select appropriate 

Coast Guard enforcement programs require useful measures of effectiveness. Such 

measures provide Sector Commander / Commanding Officers, district staffs, 

program managers, and other decision-makers with the information necessary to 

assess the impact of enforcement actions employed.

The elements of an offense are the statutory components of a violation that must be 

proven by competent evidence in order to find that a person or organization has 

committed a prohibited or illegal act. The elements of an offense are found in the 

statute or regulation itself. The elements vary depending on the alleged violation; for 

this reason, marine safety personnel must refer to the relevant statute or regulation 

for each violation. The government, in general, has the burden of providing 

sufficient proof of all of the elements of a violation. Accordingly, prior to initiating 

any enforcement action, marine safety personnel must assure a complete and 

comprehensive inspection, boarding, or investigation has gathered the facts,

witnesses, samples, photographs, or other evidence necessary to prove the elements. 

Where such evidence is not readily available at the time of the on-scene boarding, 

inspection, investigation, or exam, enforcement action should be initiated at a later 

date after sufficient evidence has been obtained. 

NOTE: Step 1 through Step 3 should be conducted using MSM Volumes II, VI, 

VII, & IX, as well as Part B of this volume. Part C of this volume should be 

consulted starting with Step 4 and proceeding through to Step 6. 

Detection

Activity: 

• Inv

estigatio

n,

Gather 

evidence for 

each element 

of suspected

violation 

Select the 

appropriate

Enforcement 

Action(s) 

Initiate 

Enforcement 

Action(s) 

Determine

the 

appropriate

penalty level 

/ sanction

Identify 

Subjects/ 

Responsible 

Parties 

C1-2 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 1: ENFORCEMENT

C1-3 

enforcement action(s) necessary to: 

• Assure timely compliance; 

• Guarantee that penalties are not considered a cost of doing business; 

• Effectively deter future violation by the party and by the public at large; and 

B.3.c. Selecting the Appropriate Enforcement Action(s) 

Marine safety personnel, units, district and area commanders must evaluate the 

following in determining which enforcement actions are applicable and appropriate: 

• Jurisdiction to impose a particular sanction; 

• The nature of the offense; 

• The seriousness of the offense; 

• The deterrent effect of enforcement action on the individuals involved; 

• The deterrent effect of enforcement on the general public; 

• The Coast Guard’s relative ranking of enforcement actions; and

C.1. NOCONSEQUENCE 

RECOMMENDATION

C.2. COMPLIANCE 

REQUIREMENTS

• Assure that penalties for a given violation in similar circumstances are 

consistent nationwide. 

• Competing compliance, investigation, and law enforcement workload. 

C. RELATIVE RANKING OF ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS

No-consequence recommendations are non-binding recommendations, verbal 

advisories, and examination result reports provided to a person or organization as a 

courtesy for safety or environmental protection purposes and which are not related to 

regulations or laws binding at the time of the Coast Guard law enforcement activities, 

typically passenger vessel, commercial fishing vessel or towing vessel examinations. 

Such recommendations are not considered part of the relevant safety/enforcement 

record for use in future Coast Guard activities. See Chapter C2 of this volume and 

volume II of this manual for more information. 

Compliance requirements are instructions to correct apparent deficiencies/violations 

of a minor nature and provide proof of that correction to the Coast Guard before a 

specific date (e.g. CG-835). Upon receiving timely and satisfactory evidence of 

correction, the Coast Guard will not to treat the underlying offense(s) as a violation. 

If timely and satisfactory evidence of correction is not corrected, the Coast Guard 

may proceed with further enforcement action as necessary to assure compliance and 

deterrence. In all cases, the compliance requirement will be considered part of the 

relevant safety record for use in future Coast Guard activities and shall be 

documented as a stay for compliance enforcement activity in Marine Information for 

Safety and Law Enforcement (MISLE). See volume II of this manual for more 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 1: ENFORCEMENT

C1-4 

C.3. WARNINGS

C.4. REFERRAL 

FOR OTHER AGENCY 

ENFORCEMENT

C.5. NOTICE OF 

VIOLATION (A.K.A.

TICKETS) 

C.6. CLASS I

ADMINISTRATIVE 

CIVIL PENALTIES

C.7. SUSPENSION 

AND REVOCATION

C.8. CLASS II

ADMINISTRATIVE 

CIVIL PENALTIES

information on CG-835s. 

Warnings are formal, written notices of an apparent violation for which no monetary 

or other sanction is appropriate. In all cases, the warning will be considered part of 

the relevant safety record for use in future Coast Guard activities. See Chapter C2 of 

this volume for further information.

Referral for Other Agency Enforcement is the forwarding of all relevant evidence 

and facts surrounding a specific offense to another agency with enforcement 

jurisdiction over the responsible party and the offense. Such referrals are considered 

part of the relevant safety record for use in future boardings, inspections, exams, 

inspections, and so on. Upon conclusive report from the affected agency that the 

referral was justified, the Coast Guard will treat the underlying offense(s) as proven 

violations for the purposes of selecting the appropriate enforcement action and 

penalty in future Coast Guard activities. 

A Notice of Violation (NOV) is a formal, written notice of an apparent violation for 

which a predetermined monetary penalty is appropriate. In all cases, the prosecution 

will be considered part of the relevant safety record for use in future Coast Guard 

activities. See COMDTINST M5582.1 (series), NOV User’s Guide, and Chapter C3 

of this volume for further information. 

The Class I Administrative Civil Penalty process is used when the issuance of a 

warning or NOV is not appropriate. These cases are adjudicated by Coast Guard 

Hearing Officers. In all cases, the prosecution will be considered part of the relevant 

safety record for use in future Coast Guard activities. See Chapter C3 of this volume 

for further information. 

A Suspension and Revocation proceeding is the presentation of all relevant evidence 

and facts surrounding a specific offense committed by a mariner who holds and/or is 

acting under the authority of a Coast Guard issued merchant mariner credential to a 

Coast Guard Administrative Law Judge for adjudication and appropriate sanction. In 

all cases, the prosecution will be considered part of the relevant safety record for use 

in future Coast Guard activities. See Chapter C4 of this volume for further 

information. 

The Class II Administrative Civil Penalty process is used only for certain violations of 

the Federal Water Pollution Control Act as amended by the Oil Pollution Act (OPA) 

and Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act 

(CERCLA). It may be pursued in egregious and willful violations of these statutes 

where the maximum penalty associated with a Class I Administrative Civil Penalty is 

deemed insufficient, or in cases where the Coast Guard desires to require the 

responsible party to create a compliance program. Class II Administrative Civil 

Penalty assessments may be made only by Administrative Law Judges using the 

procedures contained in 33 CFR Part 20. In all cases, the prosecution will be 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 1: ENFORCEMENT

C1-5 

C.9. CERTIFICATE 

OR PERMIT 

REVOCATION

C.10. REFERRAL 

FOR JUDICIAL 

PROSECUTION 

C.10.a. Judicial Civil Penalties 

C.11. CRIMINAL 

ENFORCEMENT

33 CFR 1.07-90 

C.12.

OPERATIONAL 

CONTROLS

Operational controls are the direct assumption of physical control over a person, 

vessel, facility, or waterway in order to end potentially unsafe or illegal operations. 

Operational controls include detentions, voyage terminations, COTP, and District 

Commander orders, and administrative orders under the FWPCA among others. In 

all cases, however, operational controls will be considered a part of the relevant safety 

record for use in future Coast Guard activities. See volume II of this manual and/or, 

COMDTINST M16247.1 (series), Maritime Law Enforcement Manual, for further 

information. Due to the fact that operational controls can be very minor or 

extremely serious, it was placed at the end of the enforcement relative ranking. 

considered part of the relevant safety record for use in future Coast Guard activities. 

See Chapter C3 of this volume for further information. 

Certificate or Permit Revocation is the restriction of a vessel’s operation by 

modification or removal of Coast Guard issued documents such that an apparent 

violation ceases to exist. Certificate or Permit Revocation usually accompanies other 

enforcement action, and has no bearing on whether the Coast Guard views the 

underlying offense(s) as proven. In all cases, however, certificate or permit 

revocation will be considered part of the relevant safety record for use in future Coast 

Guard activities. Due to the fact that certificate or permit revocation may or may not 

be considered extremely serious, it was placed toward the end of the enforcement 

relative ranking. See volume II of this manual for further information. 

The Judicial Civil Penalty process is the presentation of all relevant evidence and facts 

surrounding a specific offense to Federal District Court Judge for adjudication. A 

Judicial Civil Penalty may be pursued for a wide variety of violations, but is usually 

reserved for egregious and willful violations where the maximum penalties associated 

with a Class I Administrative Civil Penalty is deemed insufficient to meet 

enforcement goals. In all cases, the prosecution will be considered part of the 

relevant safety record for use in future Coast Guard activities. See Chapter C3 of this 

volume for further information. 

Referral for Criminal Enforcement is the presentation of all relevant facts and 

evidence surrounding a specific criminal offense to the U.S. Department of Justice 

for evaluation. Area, Maintenance & Logistics Command, and District Commanders 

are authorized to refer cases to the U.S. attorney. Commandant CG-545 approval is 

required before referral to the U.S. attorney for the following cases where evidence of 

a criminal offense is disclosed: marine casualties or accidents that result in death, 

marine boards, and violations of port security regulations. In all cases, referral for 

criminal enforcement will be considered part of the relevant safety record for use in 

future Coast Guard activities. 

NOTE: Not discussed in volume II is that, in accordance with ALDIST 256/97 

released by both CG-53 and CG-54, the authority to terminate commercial fishing 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 1: ENFORCEMENT

C1-6 

D.1. MULTIPLE 

SIMULTANEOUS 

ENFORCEMENT 

ACTIONS

D.2. SELECTING 

THE APPROPRIATE 

CIVIL PENALTY 

RECOMMENDATION

D.2.a. The Economic Benefit to the Offender from the 

Offense 

D.2.b. The Nature of the Offense 

D.2.c. The circumstances of the offense 

Consider whether there were unusual or severe circumstances that contributed to 

causing the offense. 

D.2.d. The Extent of the Offense(s) 

vessels voyage can be delegated from the District Commander to COTPs. 

D. ENFORCEMENT POLICY

In general, taking one enforcement action related to a specific offense does not 

preclude the Coast Guard from taking other simultaneous enforcement action. In 

significant or severe cases, multiple avenues of enforcement action will be both 

necessary and desirable in view of the general enforcement stance. The only two 

significant exceptions are those enforcement actions that derive from the Coast 

Guard’s administrative civil penalty authorities (i.e. marine safety personnel may not 

simultaneously initiate Warnings, Notices of Violation, Class I Administrative Civil 

Penalties, and Class II Administrative Civil Penalties) and those enforcement actions 

that derive from the Coast Guard’s suspension and revocation authorities (i.e. marine 

safety personnel may not simultaneously initiate a Warning and the issuance of a 

Complaint to the same individual for the same offense). 

Some statutes set forth factors that must be considered by the Coast Guard Hearing 

Officer when a civil penalty is assessed. Some of these factors have been listed 

below. In recommending a penalty, marine safety personnel may consider the 

information below in conjunction with the recommended penalty levels contained in 

the enclosures to COMDTINST 16200.3 (series), Civil Penalty Procedures and 

Administration, to determine an appropriate recommended penalty. NOTE: Penalty 

Factors were taken from ALCOAST 176/93, 137/95, 149/95, and G-MO message 

P251943Z Feb 97. 

Consider the degree to which the offender is believed to have benefited economically 

from violating federal law or regulation. At a minimum, penalties should exceed any 

economic benefit of violation. In some cases, the economic benefit gained by the 

offender may be added to the penalty recommendation. 

See D.3. below to determine the relative ranking of the specific offense in terms of 

recommended penalties. 

Consider the duration of the offense in days. Also consider the total number of 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 1: ENFORCEMENT

C1-7 

D.2.e. The Gravity of the Prohibited Acts 

D.2.f. The Degree of Culpability/Responsibility 

D.2.g. The Violation History of the Offender 

• Prior Similar Offenses. Prior proven violations of the specific law or 

regulation in question during the previous 12 months must be explicitly 

considered. 

• Prior Offenses of Any Type. For more serious (Category C and D) 

violations, consider the entire violation history of the person or organization 

for the past 5 year period. 

D.2.h. The Degree of Cooperation 

Consider the degree of success of the offender’s efforts to minimize or mitigate the 

effects of the offense (particularly spills). Evaluate and classify using the following 

categories: prompt and successful response; adequate response; inadequate response; 

poor or no response. 

D.2.i. Warnings for Oil Discharge Offenses 

Where there is no history of repeat violations or major deficiencies, the Captain of 

the Port (COTP) is authorized the discretion to issue a written warning for the 

following oil discharge offenses: 

• All Category A (non-commercial source) discharges of oil where the 

discharged amount is less than fifty (50) U.S. gallons; 

• All Category B (commercial source) discharges where the quantity of oil 

spilled is less than twenty-five (25) gallons. 

deficiencies and apparent violations encountered while conducting the detection 

activity. When seeking higher penalties on this basis, itemize the recommended 

penalty for each discrepancy and articulate the rationale used. 

Consider the impact or threat to health, welfare, the environment, or property. 

Consider incident specifics such as resulting deaths and injuries, threat or impact to 

such things as response personnel safety, government response resources expended, 

drinking water, recreation facilities, ecosystems, wildlife, marinas, etc. For spills, 

consider the volume of oil or hazardous substance discharged/released, using the 

spill size categories defined in the National Contingency Plan at 40 CFR 300.6. 

Consider the degree to which the person or organization is culpable for the offense. 

Specifically, an increasing range of culpability is: none, inattention, neglect, gross 

neglect, and intentional violation. The enforcement action selected and penalty 

amount should be more severe in instances of inattention, neglect, gross neglect, or 

intentional acts. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 1: ENFORCEMENT

C1-8 

D.2.j. Other Penalties 

D.2.k. Other Matters that Justice Requires 

D.3. OFFENSE 

CATEGORIES

D.3.a. Category A Offenses 

D.3.b. Category B Offenses 

D.3.c. Category C Offenses 

D.3.d. Category D Offenses 

E.1. SELECTING 

AN APPROPRIATE 

ENFORCEMENT OPTION

Not all of these options are appropriate in every instance. In general, marine safety 

personnel shall evaluate the least severe action and proceed toward more severe 

actions as necessary. While on-scene, qualified marine safety personnel must evaluate 

and select from the following available on-scene enforcement actions for each 

apparent violation detected. The following are listed in increasing order of severity: 

• Refer for Further Investigation (see Part B of this volume); 

• No-consequence Recommendation (see Chapter C2 of this volume); 

• Compliance Requirement (see volume II); 

• Letter of Warning (see Chapter C2 of this volume); 

• Notice of Violation (see Chapter C3 of this volume); 

When other penalties have been imposed for the same offense by state or local 

governments, the Coast Guard may give consideration to deducting some portion of 

those amounts form the penalty recommended. 

Consider adjusting the penalty up or down based on any other relevant factors not 

specified above which justice may require. 

Category A Offenses are those extremely low impact offenses committed by noncommercial entities such as recreational boaters or small-entity commercial entities 

where there are no significant issues of culpability. 

Category B Offenses are those low consequence offenses committed by small entity 

commercial people or organizations where there are no significant issues of 

culpability but immediate correction is necessary in the interest of safety of life, 

property, or the environment. 

Category C Offenses are those grave offenses committed by any commercial or noncommercial person or organization where there are significant issues of culpability. . 

Category D Offenses are those especially grave or criminal offenses committed by 

any commercial or non-commercial person or organization where there are 

significant issues of culpability that clearly warrant a substantial penalty. 

E. ON-SCENE ENFORCEMENT OPTIONS AND RESPONSIBILITIES
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 1: ENFORCEMENT

C1-9 

• Temporary Merchant Mariner Credential Suspension (see Chapter C4 of this 

volume); 

• Impose Operational Control (see volume II); and/or 

F.1. REVIEW OF 

ON-SCENE 

ENFORCEMENT 

DECISIONS

The Sector Commander / Commanding Officer shall review each enforcement 

action taken or recommended under his or her authority. Such review is normally 

delegated to senior department heads, though the Sector Commander / Commanding 

Officer should retain personal review of the most serious enforcement actions. 

Based upon that review, the Sector Commander / Commanding Officer may: 

• Initiate Unit Enforcement Actions. When the Sector Commander / 

Commanding Officer determines that unit-level enforcement action is 

appropriate, he or she may initiate a new enforcement action. Many of the 

more serious enforcement actions cannot be initiated by marine safety 

personnel while on-scene. They will typically refer these instances along with 

a recommended course of unit action. In these cases where review of the 

evidence warrants it, the Sector Commander / Commanding Officer shall 

initiate the appropriate enforcement action. 

• Return the Enforcement Action to the on-scene marine safety 

personnel for further documentation or investigation. When the Sector 

Commander / Commanding Officer determines that insufficient 

documentation or evidence exists to warrant the recommended enforcement 

action, he or she may return the activity to the appropriate field personnel for 

further documentation or investigation. Where enforcement action has 

already taken place, that action must be withdrawn pending completion of 

adequate investigation or documentation. 

• Withdraw and close the Enforcement Action. When the Sector 

Commander / Commanding Officer determines that the documentation or 

evidence provided does not meet the required jurisdictional and factual 

elements of the discrepancy or violation, he or she may withdraw the 

enforcement action pending further investigation, or close the enforcement 

action. When an enforcement action is withdrawn and closed, the Sector 

Commander / Commanding Officer shall assure that the marine safety 

personnel that initiated the enforcement action are advised of his or her 

decision. 

• Upgrade or Downgrade to a more appropriate enforcement action. 

When the Sector Commander / Commanding Officer determines that marine 

safety personnel selected an inappropriate enforcement action given the 

situation, he or she may upgrade or downgrade to a more appropriate 

enforcement action. When an enforcement action is upgraded or 

• Forward to unit for Future Enforcement Action. 

F. UNIT ENFORCEMENT OPTIONS AND RESPONSIBILITIES
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 1: ENFORCEMENT

C1-10 

downgraded, the Sector Commander / Commanding Officer shall assure that 

the marine safety personnel that initiated the enforcement action are advised 

of his or her decision. 

F.2. INITIATING 

UNIT ENFORCEMENT 

ACTIONS

In general, Sector Commanders / Commanding Officers shall evaluate the 

enforcement actions recommended by marine safety personnel under their command 

to assure they are appropriate. Where appropriate and necessary, the Sector 

Commander / Commanding Officer may initiate enforcement actions, including: 

• Refer to Other Agency for Enforcement Action (see F.3. below); 

• Compliance Requirement (see volume II); 

• Letter of Warning (see Chapter C2 of this volume); 

• Notice of Violation (see Chapter C3 of this volume); 

• Class I Administrative Civil Penalty (see Chapter C3 of this volume); 

• Merchant Mariner Credential Suspension and Revocation (see Chapter C4 of 

this volume); 

• Refer for Class II Administrative Civil Penalty Prosecution (see Chapter C3 

of this volume); 

• Revoke Certificate or Permit (see volume II); 

• Refer for Judicial Prosecution (see Chapter C3 of this volume); and/or 

F.3. REFERRAL TO 

OTHER AGENCY FOR 

ENFORCEMENT ACTION

G.1. REVIEW OF 

UNIT ENFORCEMENT 

DECISIONS

The District Commander shall review each enforcement action referred for his/her 

action. Based upon that review, the District Commander may: 

• Return the Enforcement Activity to the Unit for further Documentation 

or Investigation. When the District Commander determines that 

insufficient documentation or evidence exists to warrant the recommended 

enforcement action, he or she may return the activity to the appropriate unit 

for further documentation or investigation. 

• Forward to the Appropriate Unit. When the Sector Commander / 

Commanding Officer determines that he or she lacks the authority or ability 

to take the appropriate enforcement action (as for Judicial Prosecution), he or 

she may forward evidence of the apparent violation(s) to another unit 

through the chain of command. 

• Impose/Request Operational Controls (see volume II). 

Where the Coast Guard detects violations or deficiencies over which other agencies 

have sole enforcement jurisdiction, marine safety personnel shall refer such violations 

to the cognizant federal, state, or local law enforcement agency via the cognizant 

District Commander.

G. DISTRICT ENFORCEMENT OPTIONS AND RESPONSIBILITIES
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 1: ENFORCEMENT

C1-11 

• Return the Enforcement Activity to the Unit to Upgrade or Downgrade 

to a more appropriate Enforcement Action. When the District 

Commander determines that the forwarding unit selected an inappropriate 

enforcement action given the situation, he or she may return the enforcement 

activity to the appropriate unit to upgrade or downgrade to a more 

appropriate enforcement action. Decisions of the District Commander may 

be appealed to the Office of Investigations and Analysis, Commandant (CG545) by the Sector Commander / Commanding Officer. 

• Prosecute or Forward the Enforcement Activity to the Appropriate 

Prosecuting Entity. When the District Commander determines that the 

forwarding unit provided a complete enforcement package, the District 

Commander shall prosecute or forward the enforcement activity to the 

appropriate prosecuting entity (i.e. Hearing Officer, U.S. Attorney, etc.) 

G.2. ACTION ON 

UNIT ENFORCEMENT 

REFERRALS

H.1. GENERAL The Office of Investigations and Analysis, Commandant CG-545 shall: 

• Provide Commandant approval before referral to the U.S. attorney for any 

case where evidence of a criminal offense is disclosed and the case involves 

marine casualties or accidents that result in death, marine boards, and 

violations of port security regulations. 

• Coordinate with and obtain TJAG (CG-094) approval before referring a 

criminal case to the U.S. attorney that involves a potential charge under 18 

U.S.C 1115, commonly refereed to as the Seaman’s Manslaughter statute. 

• Provide oversight, management, and control of Enforcement for the 

Assistant Commandant for Marine Safety, Security and Stewardship; 

• Provide guidance to Areas/Districts/field units regarding all Enforcement 

issues. 

• Coordination of Multiple Units/Districts. When the District Commander 

determines that multiple units/districts share jurisdiction over the subject of

the enforcement action the appropriate District Commander(s) shall 

coordinate all enforcement efforts including the forwarding of evidence of 

the apparent violation(s) to another unit through the chain of command. 

When multiple Districts are involved the Office of Investigations and 

Analysis, Commandant (CG-545) shall be notified via the chain of command. 

The District Commander, in determining his or her course of action on referrals, may 

evaluate the same factors outlined in D.2. above. If the recommended enforcement 

option is applicable and appropriate, the District Commander should prosecute or 

forward the case as appropriate. 

H. COMMANDANT ENFORCEMENT RESPONSIBILITIES

• Evaluate the timeliness, effectiveness, and consistency of Enforcement 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 1: ENFORCEMENT

C1-12 

I.1. INTRAGOVERNMENTAL 

ENFORCEMENT 

COORDINATION

I.1.a. U. S. Government Agencies 

I.1.a.1. Customs Service Holds On Vessels 

Under the authority of 46 U.S.C. 91, vessels intending to depart the United States for 

a foreign port must obtain a clearance from the U. S. Customs Service. The Customs 

Service under 19 CFR 4.61 and applicable U. S. law, will normally withhold or deny 

clearance based upon a request from the Coast Guard in order to ensure vessel 

compliance with shipping laws and international conventions. Normally, the U. S. 

Customs Service will exercise its authority to hold vessels upon request in order to: 

• Obtain compliance of specific laws and implementing regulations through the 

exercise of the following specific citations authorizing detention or denial of 

clearance: 

• U.S. vessel documentation requirements (46 U.S.C.A. 12102) under 19 CFR 

4.61(b)(3); 

• Applicable load line requirements (46 U.S.C.A. 5113(b) under 19 CFR 4.65a; 

• Certificate of Inspection or Control Verification requirements (46 U.S.C.A. 

Chapter 33) under 19 CFR 4.66; 

• Any violation of regulations in 33 CFR 130 regarding requirements for 

Certificates Of Financial Responsibility for oil pollution, under 33 U.S.C. 

2716 (b)(1); 

• Permit under the Shore Protection Act of 1988 under 33 U.S.C. 2605 (c); and 

• Requirements relating to a Certificate issued under the International 

Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships (MARPOL) when the 

vessel in question is subject to a Coast Guard detention order (33 U.S.C. 1904 

Action nationwide for long-term fairness and equity. 

I. INTRA-GOVERNMENTAL AND INTERNATIONAL ENFORCEMENT 

COORDINATION

U. S. maritime law enforcement efforts involve many other federal agencies, including 

the Minerals Management Service, Immigration and Naturalization Service, U. S. 

Customs Service, U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, Research and Special Programs 

Administration, the Federal Communications Commission, Department of Labor, 

Environmental Protection Agency, Occupational Safety and Health Administration, 

Federal Bureau of Investigation, U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Department of 

Interior, Maritime Administration, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service of the 

U. S. Department of Agriculture, etc. Interagency coordination of effort has been 

established through Memorandums of Understanding, Memorandums of Agreement, 

and Interagency Agreements, and is contained in volume X of this manual. In 

particular, the U. S. Customs Service and Department of Justice often provide 

significant law enforcement assistance, as detailed below. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 1: ENFORCEMENT

C1-13 

(f), 19 CFR 4.66c. (b) and (c)). 

• Obtain Letter of Undertaking or Surety Bond required under 33 U.S.C. 

1321(b) (12) from a vessel owner, operator, or person in charge based upon 

the existence of either known liability for an existing unpaid FWPCA civil 

penalty or the existence of prima facie evidence to suspect an FWPCA 

violation has occurred. Customs Service authority is detailed in 19 CFR 

4.66a. 

• Obtain Letter of Undertaking or Surety Bond required under 33 U.S.C. 1908 

(e), of the Act to Prevent Pollution from Ships, from a vessel owner, 

operator, or person in charge based upon the existence of either known 

liability for an existing unpaid MARPOL civil penalty or criminal fine, or the 

existence of prima facie evidence to suspect a MARPOL violation has 

occurred. Customs Service authority is detailed in 19 CFR 4.66c. 

I.1.a.2. Department Of Justice Assistance 

All interactions with the Department of Justice shall be approved in advance by the 

Area, Maintenance & Logistics Command, and District Commander. The following 

are a few areas in which they can assist with enforcement: 

• Request the U. S. Attorney to prosecute criminal violations. Use of statutes 

or regulations providing for criminal penalties against individuals may be 

initiated when appropriate, regardless of whether or not the individuals 

involved hold a Coast Guard merchant mariner credential. The requesting 

unit should forward possible criminal violation cases to the cognizant District 

legal office for review and possible referral to the U.S. attorney for action. 

Examples include reckless and negligent operation of a vessel, intoxication 

while operating a vessel, intentional discharges, and failure to notify in 

pollution incidents or marine casualties. 

I.1.b. State Governments 

Note: Customs clearance withholding is not a general enforcement tool. Refer to 

your District legal office for further guidance. 

Request a temporary restraining order (TRO) or injunction from Federal Court to 

prohibit a person from carrying out a specific act, the violation of which results in 

arrest. Federal court action should only be sought when all direct enforcement 

actions have proven insufficient to prohibit individuals from initiating or continuing 

high risk operations. For example, a TRO or injunction might be sought when a 

vessel subject to inspection continues to operate without a Certificate of Inspection, 

despite notification of the inspection requirements and a direction to cease operations 

(Assisted Operational Control). Consult the cognizant District legal office prior to 

initiating any such request. 

Many states with coastal zones and inland waterways open to commercial vessel 

traffic have established programs which parallel Coast Guard marine safety efforts. 

With the passage of the Oil Pollution Act of 1990, many states are redefining and 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 1: ENFORCEMENT

C1-14 

I.2.

INTERNATIONAL 

ENFORCEMENT 

COORDINATION

I.2.a. General 

Formal communication between the United States and foreign governments 

requesting the enforcement of international safety, security or environmental 

protection requirements (i.e., SOLAS, STCW, ILO 147, MARPOL, etc.) are often an 

effective means of eliciting increased cooperation. Coast Guard requests will 

normally be initiated by the appropriate CG-54 program manager, cleared by the 

chain of command, and forwarded as follows: 

• SOLAS, STCW, and ILO 147 Communications. Communications 

concerning SOLAS, STCW, and ILO 147 are routed to the Director of the 

Office of Maritime and Land Transit (EB/TRA/MA) at the U. S. State 

Department for action. 

• MARPOL Communication. Communications concerning MARPOL are 

routed to the Director of the Office of Oceans and International Scientific 

Affairs (OES) at the U. S. State Department for action. 

I.2.b. Detention Reporting And Deficiency Referrals 

expanding their marine safety and marine environmental protection programs 

through state legislation and regulation. Coast Guard and state efforts are 

coordinated through Memorandums of Understanding (MOU) between Coast Guard 

District Commanders and individual states. These MOUs are agreements of broad 

scope, coordinating the state’s and the Coast Guard’s international, domestic, 

regional, state and local agendas, and providing the foundation for law enforcement 

cooperation.

NOTE: Prior to forwarding international referrals for enforcement, the Coast Guard 

shall exhaust all domestic enforcement options. 

International reporting of specific port state detentions/interventions under the 

applicable international convention or the referral of STCW, MARPOL, SOLAS, or 

ILO 147 deficiencies for possible flag state control are addressed in volume II of this 

manual. 
USCG Marine Safety Manual 

Volume V: Investigations and Enforcement

PART C: ENFORCEMENT 

Chapter Two: 

Warnings
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 2: WARNINGS

C2-i 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

A. WARNINGS .................................. 1

A.1. GENERAL .........................................................................................................................................................................1

A.1.a. Authority to Issue Warnings......................................................................................................................................1

A.2. NO“VERBAL” WARNINGS ................................................................................................................................................1

A.3. NO LETTERS OF CONCERN ...............................................................................................................................................1

B. USE OF WARNINGS ............................ 1

B.1. GENERAL .........................................................................................................................................................................1

B.2. WHEN A WARNING IS APPROPRIATE ................................................................................................................................2

B.2.a. Discharges of Oil.......................................................................................................................................................2

B.3. WHEN A WARNING IS INAPPROPRIATE .............................................................................................................................2

B.3.a. Marine Safety, Security and Environmental Laws/Regulations.................................................................................2

B.3.b. Suspension and Revocation Proceedings ..................................................................................................................3

B.4. MARINE SAFETY PERSONNEL CONSIDERED “BOARDING OFFICERS”................................................................................3

C. PROCESS FOR WARNINGS ........................ 3

C.1. GENERAL .........................................................................................................................................................................3

C.2. ISSUING A WARNING ........................................................................................................................................................3

C.3. ACTION AFTER A WARNING IS DECLINED.........................................................................................................................4

C.4. APPEALS OF WARNINGS ...................................................................................................................................................4

C.5. FOREIGN VESSELS............................................................................................................................................................4

C.6. DATA ENTRY....................................................................................................................................................................4 

FIGURE C2-1: WARNING IN LIEU OF CIVIL PENALTY ............................................................................................................5

FIGURE C2-2: WARNING IN LIEU OF SUSPENSION AND REVOCATION PROCEEDINGS.............................................................6

FIGURE C2-3: WARNING IN LIEU OF CIVIL PENALTY PROCEEDINGS FOR VIOLATIONS LISTED IN 33 CFR 1.08-1 FOR 

UNINSPECTED...........................................................................................................................................................................7
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 2: WARNINGS

C2-1 

A. WARNINGS

A.1. GENERAL Warnings are an enforcement action in the form of a formal, written notice of an 

apparent violation, which no monetary or other sanction is appropriate, with 

consequences for its refusal. Such warnings may be accepted or declined by the 

receiving individual. When accepted, the Coast Guard treats the underlying 

offense(s) as proven violations for the purposes of selecting an appropriate 

enforcement action and penalty for future enforcement actions. When declined, the 

Coast Guard will proceed with further enforcement action as necessary to assure 

compliance and deterrence as detailed below. In all cases, the warning will be

considered part of the relevant safety record for use in future Coast Guard activities. 

A.1.a. Authority to Issue Warnings 

The authority for Officers in Charge, Marine Inspections (OCMIs) and Captains of 

the Port (COTPs) to issue warnings in lieu of civil proceedings was granted by 

Presidential Memorandum dated April 21, 1995, which was broadly implemented by 

the Coast Guard on July 14, 1995 via ALDIST 137/95, SUBJ: REGULATORY 

REFORM-WAIVER OF PENALTIES, and further expanded in message P 251943Z 

FEB 97, SUBJ: CIVIL PENALTY PROCESS. The authority for OCMIs and 

Investigating Officers (IOs) to issue warnings in lieu of Suspension & Revocation 

(S&R) proceedings comes from 46 CFR 5.105. 

A.2.

NO “VERBAL” WARNINGS

As a matter of policy, there are no “verbal” warnings. What may have previously 

been called a verbal warning is not authorized. Warnings shall be written and contain 

the regulatory cite that was violated and consequences for refusal or a statement that

the matter is being referred to the appropriate agency with jurisdiction. 

A.3. NO LETTERS 

OF CONCERN

As a matter of policy, there are no Letters of Concern (may also be referred to as 

“Local Letters of Warning”). An example of a Letter of Concern would be the Coast 

Guard expressing concern (versus issuing a warning and/or operational control) 

regarding a potentially dangerous situation within the port. The previously issued 

Letters of Concern shall be issued as Letters of Warning (LOWs) or as general 

correspondence with a reference to the Coast Guard being “concerned” about the 

issue. 

B. USE OF WARNINGS

B.1. GENERAL Enforcement action is the next step beyond educational efforts, no-consequence 

recommendations, compliance requirements, and regulatory controls imposed to 

minimize maritime risks. It supports the overall goal of the Marine Safety, Security 

and Environmental Protection Program to promote the safety of life and property at 

sea and to protect the marine environment. The use of warnings saves staff hours in 

processing violation cases or preparing for a S&R proceeding while still serving the 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 2: WARNINGS

C2-2 

purpose of educating the public about federal laws and regulations and providing an 

acceptable level of deterrence against subsequent violations. 

B.2. WHEN A 

WARNING IS 

APPROPRIATE

Warnings are used when taking enforcement action that does not meet the level of a 

notice of violation (NOV), Class I administrative civil penalty, or S&R proceeding. 

Warnings are appropriate for the majority of the offenses routinely encountered 

except those endangering life, property or the environment. See B.3. below for 

examples of when it is inappropriate to issue a warning in lieu of pursuing civil 

penalty or S&R proceedings. 

__________________________________________________________________ 

B.2.a. Discharges of Oil 

Enforcement action (LOW, NOV or Class I or II Administrative Civil Penalty) shall 

be initiated on all discharges of oil when the investigation enables you to document 

each of the five (5) elements of an unlawful discharge. The following categories of 

discharges of harmful quantities of oil as defined by table 1-C of COMDTINST 

M16200.3(series), Civil Penalty Procedures and Administration, establish the 

maximum quantity of oil discharged in which the OCMI/COTP may opt to issue a 

LOW in lieu of issuing an NOV or pursuing a Class I or II Administrative Civil 

Penalty: 

• All Category A (non-commercial source) discharges where the quantity of oil 

spilled is less than fifty (50) U.S. gallons; and 

• All Category B (commercial source) discharges where the quantity of oil 

spilled is less than twenty-five (25) U.S. gallons 

A warning must be issued whenever Civil Penalty enforcement action is waived. 

No more than two (2) warnings shall be issued to a party for a discharge meeting the 

above criteria within a 12 month period. 

__________________________________________________________________ 

B.3. WHEN A 

WARNING IS 

INAPPROPRIATE

In general, warnings shall not be issued in lieu of Class II Administrative Civil 

Penalties or Criminal Enforcement actions. The OCMI/COTP retains the authority 

to not issue a warning for any offenses for which a warning is authorized, if in their 

discretion the Coast Guard’s enforcement goals would be better served by pursuing a 

higher level of enforcement (either Civil Penalty or S&R). 

__________________________________________________________________ 

B.3.a. Marine Safety, Security and Environmental Laws/Regulations

Warnings shall not be issued in lieu of pursuing Civil Penalty action for the following: 

• Any violation that represents a significant threat to health, safety, or the 

environment; 

• Any intentional violation; 

• A second violation of the exact same offense within a 2-year period; 

• Any second violation of different statutes/regulations within a year period; or 

• When more than three violations of different statutes/regulations are 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 2: WARNINGS

C2-3 

discovered during any single detection activity. 

______________________________________________________________ 

B.3.b. Suspension and Revocation Proceedings

Warnings shall not be issued in lieu of pursuing S&R proceedings for the following: 

• Acts or Offenses for which revocation is mandatory or is sought as detailed in 

46 CFR 5.59 and 5.61; 

• Offenses listed in the Table of suggested orders in 46 CFR Part 5 for which 

the minimum recommended order is a 3 month or more suspension; 

• Any second enforcement action against a merchant mariner’s credential 

within a three-year period. 

_________________________________________________________________ 

B.4. MARINE 

SAFETY PERSONNEL 

CONSIDERED 

“ BOARDING 

OFFICERS ” 

As a matter of policy, marine safety personnel are considered “boarding officers” 

when applying the written warnings for the violations listed in 33 CFR 1.08. 

Therefore, when issuing warnings for violations listed in 33 CFR 1.08, there must be 

coordination between the offices working for the cognizant District Commander in 

order to meet the procedures required in 33 CFR 1.08-5. 

EXCEPTION: Marine safety personnel are to follow the procedures of 

33 CFR 1.08-5 for the specific violations listed in 33 CFR 1.08-1(a)(7), 

33 CFR 1.08-1(a)(9), and 33 CFR 1.08-1(a)(11) only when they apply to uninspected 

vessels. 

NOTE: The requirement that “a written warning may not be issued where the 

operator is required to be licensed,” under 33 CFR 1.08-1(b)(1) ensures that a 

licensed operator is held to a higher standard than a recreational boater. As a licensed 

operator a warning in lieu of civil penalty proceedings is not permitted for those 

violations listed in 33 CFR 1.08. A civil penalty shall be pursued and the initiation of 

S&R proceedings may also be appropriate. However, a warning in lieu of S&R 

proceedings is permitted if appropriate. 

__________________________________________________________________ 

C. PROCESS FOR WARNINGS

C.1. GENERAL Upon completion of the detection activity and a determination based upon review of 

the criteria above that a warning is appropriate, a LOW shall be drafted using the 

templates provided in Figures 1, 2 or 3 at the end of this chapter, for signature by the 

appropriate unit personnel with “by direction” authority. All warnings must be 

signed by the party issued the warning, or contain a statement detailing proof of 

receipt by the party as described below. 

C.2. ISSUING A 

WARNING 

LOWs may be personally delivered to the party or may be issued via the mail. Proof 

of receipt by the party is required. If the LOW is personally delivered to the party 

and the party does not immediately accept it, or the LOW is mailed to the party, a 

notation should be entered in the signature block of the unit copy explaining the 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 2: WARNINGS

C2-4 

disposition of the LOW (e.g. mailed to party via certified mail, mailed to the party 

with return receipt attached, hand delivered at scene, etc). Warnings are considered 

accepted when properly served and not declined in writing within 30 days after 

receipt by the party. Templates of LOWs issued in lieu of both civil penalty action 

and S&R proceedings are located in the Figures at the end of this chapter. 

C.3. ACTION 

AFTER A WARNING IS 

DECLINED

Regardless of whether the warning is issued by the OCMI/COTP in lieu of civil 

penalty action or by the OCMI in lieu of S&R proceedings, a warning that is declined 

shall result in the initiation of the next level of enforcement (e.g. Notice of Violation, 

Class I Administrative Civil Penalty, or S&R proceedings). 

C.4. APPEALS OF 

WARNINGS

Warnings issued under 33 CFR 1.08, may be appealed under the procedures of that 

regulation. Warnings issued by a Hearing Officer may be appealed under 33 CFR 

1.07-70. Warnings issued by an ALJ may be appealed under the S&R process. 

Warnings issued by an IO may be subject to review or reconsideration if requested in 

writing. Warnings issued by an IO are not subject to an appeal because an appeal of a 

LOW issued by an IO would be akin to non-acceptance and the next level of 

enforcement action shall be initiated, an appeal would be available at that level. 

C.5. FOREIGN 

VESSELS

Issuing warnings to foreign vessels, personnel, companies, etc., shall be treated in the 

same manner as discussed above. 

C.6. DATA ENTRY The issuance of all LOWs shall be documented in the Marine Information for Safety 

and Law Enforcement (MISLE) data system in accordance with the applicable 

MISLE Process Guide. The signed warning shall be scanned and electronically 

attached to the enforcement activity (see the MISLE Process Guide for scanning 

instructions). The original signed warning shall be maintained in the case file at the 

unit in accordance with the Information and Life Cycle Manual, COMDTINST 

M5212.12A (series) until further notice. Additionally, for violations listed in 33 CFR 

1.08, if the signed warning is appealed, it is prima facie evidence for the follow-on 

civil penalty action and/or S&R proceeding. 

See also: Chapter C4 on NMC notifications. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 2: WARNINGS

FIGURE C2-1: WARNING IN LIEU OF CIVIL PENALTY

Commanding Officer 

United States Coast Guard 

Sector San Francisco Bay

Building 14, Coast Guard Island

Alameda, CA 94501-5100 

Phone: (510) 437-3149 

FAX: (510) 437-3072 

Email: 

16731 

January 22, 200X 

Mr. Joe Somebody

57 High Street

Oakland, CA 94501

Subject: WARNING IN LIEU OF CIVIL PENALTY 

Dear Mr. Somebody:

Coast Guard personnel from my office visited your facility/vessel/terminal/etc on January 21, 200X, and discovered the 

following violation:

Violation Cite: 33 CFR 128.210(b)(1)

To wit: While serving as terminal security officer at the San Francisco Passenger Terminal from January 01, 2000 to January 

21, 2002, you failed to ensure that comprehensive security survey was updated. 

It was determined that justice will be best served by issuing you a warning rather than pursuing a monetary penalty for your 

conduct as set forth above. You are advised that this warning will become a matter of Coast Guard record and will be

considered for any future enforcement actions against you. You may accept or decline this warning by indicating your choice 

below. Sign and date below and return a copy to the address above within 30 days of receipt. Failure to return a signed copy

will result in the Coast Guard considering this warning accepted. Should you choose to decline this warning, civil penalty 

proceedings will be initiated against you in accordance with 33 CFR 1.07. You may contact me at the number above with

any questions. 

 Sincerely, 

NAME 

Rank, U.S. Coast Guard

Position

By direction 

******************************************************************************

I hereby accept / decline the above-mentioned warning. 

___________________________________________________ ___________________

Name (print & signature) Date 

C2-5 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 2: WARNINGS

FIGURE C2-2: WARNING IN LIEU OF SUSPENSION AND REVOCATION PROCEEDINGS

Commanding Officer 

United States Coast Guard 

Sector San Francisco Bay

Building 14, Coast Guard Island

Alameda, CA 94501-5100 

Phone: (510) 437-3149 

FAX: (510) 437-3072 

Email: 

16722 

January 22, 200X 

Mr. Joe Somebody

57 High Street

Oakland, CA 94501

Subject: WARNING IN LIEU OF SUSPENSION AND REVOCATION PROCEEDINGS 

Dear Mr. Somebody:

An investigation has revealed the following conduct on your part while serving aboard the M/V SEA LION, O.N. 123456

under the authority of Merchant Mariner's Document No. 123459:

Complaint: Misconduct (46 CFR 5.27) 

Violation Cite: (applicable only for Violation of Law or Regulation (46 CFR 5.33) and shall be removed for other offenses) 

To wit: While serving as able seaman aboard said vessel on 5 and 6 January 2002, you failed to report for work in violation

of Port Authority policy. 

It was determined that justice will be best served by a issuing a warning rather than conducting a formal proceeding for your 

conduct as set forth above. You are advised that if you accept this warning it will become a part of your merchant mariner’s 

record and will be considered during any future enforcement actions and credentialing transactions involving you. By

accepting this warning you are not admitting any civil liability on your part or on the part of the M/V SEA LION, or its 

owner(s) and operator(s). You may accept or decline this warning by indicating your choice below. Sign and date below and 

return a copy to the address above within 30 days of receipt. Failure to return a signed copy will result in the Coast Guard 

considering this warning accepted. Should you choose to decline this warning, suspension and revocation proceedings will 

be initiated against your Merchant Mariner’s Credential in accordance with Title 46, United States Code, Chapter 77. You 

may contact me at the number above with questions. 

 Sincerely, 

NAME 

Rank, U.S. Coast Guard

Position

By direction 

******************************************************************************

I hereby accept / decline the above-mentioned warning. 

_________________________________________________________ ___________________

Name (print & signature) Date 

C2-6 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 2: WARNINGS

FIGURE C2-3: WARNING IN LIEU OF CIVIL PENALTY PROCEEDINGS FOR VIOLATIONS LISTED IN 33 CFR 1.08-1

FOR UNINSPECTED VESSELS

Commanding Officer 

United States Coast Guard 

Sector San Francisco Bay

Building 14, Coast Guard Island

Alameda, CA 94501-5100 

Phone: (510) 437-3149 

FAX: (510) 437-3072 

Email: 

16781 

January 22, 200X 

Mr. Joe Somebody

57 High Street

Oakland, CA 94501

Subject: WARNING IN LIEU OF CIVIL PENALTY PROCEEDINGS FOR VIOLATIONS LISTED IN 33 CFR 1.08-1

FOR UNINSPECTED VESSELS 

Dear Mr. Somebody:

Coast Guard personnel from my office visited your vessel on January 21, 200X, and discovered the following violation: 

Violation Cite: 33 CFR 88.05 

To wit: While serving as operator of the uninspected vessel LUCKY LUCY, O.N. 123456 on January 21, 2002, you failed to

have on board a copy of the Inland Navigation Rules. 

In consideration that justice will be best served by a warning rather than a civil penalty proceeding, in accordance with 33 

CFR 1.08, you are hereby given a written warning for your conduct as set forth above. You are advised that this warning will 

become a matter of Coast Guard record and will be considered during any future enforcement actions involving you in

accordance with the following as per 33 CFR 1.08-5(f): 

• The warning will be kept on file for a period of not more than one year after the date of issue or in the case of a 

violation of 33 CFR 159 a period of not more than three years for reference in determining appropriate penalty 

action if there is a subsequent violation;

• If a record check reveals a prior written warning or violation within the time period designated in 33 CFR 1.08-5(d), 

the warning will be revoked and civil penalty action instituted; 

• If an additional violation occurs within the time period designated in 33 CFR 1.08-5(d) the warning may be used as 

a basis for the assessment of a higher penalty for the subsequent violation; and 

• Within 15 days after the date of issue, the person who is issued the warning may appeal to the District Commander 

by providing in writing or in person any information or material that denies, explains, or mitigates the violations 

noted in the warning. 

If no appeal is made within 15 days, the Coast Guard will consider this warning accepted.

 Sincerely, 

NAME 

Rank, U.S. Coast Guard

Position

By direction 

C2-7 
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 
USCG Marine Safety Manual 

Volume V: Investigations and Enforcement

PART C: ENFORCEMENT 

Chapter Three: 

Civil Penalties
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 3: CIVIL PENALTIES 

C3-i 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

A. CIVIL PENALTIES ............................ 1

A.1. GENERAL .........................................................................................................................................................................1

A.2. DEFINITIONS ....................................................................................................................................................................1

A.2.a. Deficiency.................................................................................................................................................................1

A.2.b. Violation ...................................................................................................................................................................1

A.2.b.1. Major Violation .....................................................................................................................................................1

A.2.b.2. Minor Violation .....................................................................................................................................................1

A.2.c. Prima Facie Evidence...............................................................................................................................................1

A.2.d. Nonconforming Vessel or Facility............................................................................................................................2

A.2.e. Substandard Vessel or Facility .................................................................................................................................2

B. TYPES OF CIVIL PENALTIES ..................... 2

B.1. NOV/TICKETS..................................................................................................................................................................2

B.2. CLASS I ADMINSTRATIVE CIVIL PENALTY .......................................................................................................................2

B.3. CLASS II ADMINISTRATIVE CIVIL PENALTY .....................................................................................................................3

B.4. JUDICIAL ..........................................................................................................................................................................3

C. CIVIL PENALTY PROCESS ....................... 3

C.1. GENERAL..........................................................................................................................................................................3

C.1.a. Application of Civil Penalties...................................................................................................................................3

C.1.b. Selection of Charged Parties....................................................................................................................................3

C.1.c. Adjudication .............................................................................................................................................................3

C.1.d. Letters of Undertaking / Surety Bonds for Foreign Vessels.....................................................................................4

C.2. CIVIL PENALTY CASE.......................................................................................................................................................4

C.2.a. Initiation of Civil Penalty Cases ..............................................................................................................................4

C.2.b. Preparation of Civil Penalty Cases..........................................................................................................................4

C.2.c. Civil Penalty MISLE Enforcement Activity Contents...............................................................................................5

C.2.d. Hearing Office Review .............................................................................................................................................5

C.3. HEARING OFFICE ACTION ................................................................................................................................................5

C.3.a. General.....................................................................................................................................................................5

C.3.b. Notification...............................................................................................................................................................5

C.3.c. Counsel / Party Representative ................................................................................................................................6

C.3.d. In-Person Hearings..................................................................................................................................................6

C.3.e. Disclosure.................................................................................................................................................................6

C.3.f. Witnesses...................................................................................................................................................................6

C.3.g. Agency Participation................................................................................................................................................7

C.3.h. Requests for Confidential Treatment........................................................................................................................7

C.3.i. Decisions...................................................................................................................................................................7

C.3.j. Dismissals - Citations ...............................................................................................................................................7

C.3.k. Dismissals - Cases....................................................................................................................................................7

C.3.l. Warnings...................................................................................................................................................................8

C.3.m. Appeals....................................................................................................................................................................8

C.3.n. Reopening of Hearings.............................................................................................................................................8

C.4. REPORTS OF VIOLATIONS INVOLVING BOTH CIVIL AND CRIMINAL PENALTY PROVISIONS.................................................8

D. CIVIL PENALTY AUTHORITY UNDER THE FWPCA, AS 

AMENDED....................................... 9
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 3: CIVIL PENALTIES 

C3-ii 

D.1. COAST GUARD RESPONSIBILITIES....................................................................................................................................9

D.2. CIVIL PENALTY ENFORCEMENT ACTION..........................................................................................................................9

D.3. CIVIL PENALTY ENFORCEMENT OPTIONS ........................................................................................................................9

D.4. PROPER PARTY DETERMINATION ...................................................................................................................................10

D.4.a. Determining the Source .........................................................................................................................................10

D.4.b. Determining the Owner/Operator..........................................................................................................................10

D.4.c. OCMI/COTP Determination ..................................................................................................................................11

D. 5. CIVIL PENALTY ASSESSMENT UNDER SECTION 1321(J)(1) ...........................................................................................11

D. 6. CIVIL PENALTY ASSESSMENT FOR MARINE SANITATION DEVICE (MSD) VIOLATIONS ................................................11 

FIGURE C3-1: OPTIONAL STANDARD FORM LETTER OF UNDERTAKING (LOU)..................................................................12
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 3: CIVIL PENALTIES 

C3-1 

A.1. GENERAL

A.2. DEFINITIONS A.2.a. Deficiency 

A.2.b. Violation 

A violation is any deficiency resulting from a failure to meet applicable U. S. statutory 

or regulatory requirements where sufficient evidence exists to initiate administrative, 

judicial, or criminal proceedings (including suspension and revocation hearings, civil 

penalty hearings, and criminal prosecution) as appropriate. 

A.2.b.1. Major Violation 

A.2.b.2. Minor Violation 

Minor violations are all civil penalty violations not classified as major. 

A.2.c. Prima Facie Evidence 

Prima facie evidence is evidence good and sufficient on its face; such evidence as, in 

the judgment of the law, is sufficient to establish a given fact, or the group or chain 

of facts constituting the party's claim or defense, and which, if not rebutted or

contradicted, will remain sufficient. Prima facie evidence is evidence which, if 

unexplained or uncontradicted, is sufficient to sustain a judgment in favor of the issue 

which it supports, but which may be contradicted by other evidence. 

A. CIVIL PENALTIES

This chapter discusses the roles of the district, unit prevention department personnel, 

and the civil penalty Hearing Office in the disposition of reported violations of 

federal statutes or regulations. Its purpose is to promote uniform procedures in the 

preparation and processing of civil penalty cases. The governing regulations for civil 

penalty proceedings are found in Title 33, Code of Federal Regulations, § 1.07 (33 

CFR 1.07). 

A deficiency is any condition, operation, or act pertaining to a vessel or facility that 

fails to meet acceptable standards including but not limited to those established by 

applicable international conventions, U. S. laws or regulations, industry standards, 

equipment manufacturers recommendations, "good marine practice," etc. Examples 

include equipment which is considered to be unsatisfactory for its intended purpose; 

vessel or facility operations which place persons, property, or the environment at risk; 

or inadequate response by personnel to contingency drills. 

Major violations are any criminal or civil penalty violations of federal law or 

regulation which create an immediate and critical risk to lives, property, or the 

environment. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 3: CIVIL PENALTIES 

C3-2 

A.2.d. Nonconforming Vessel or Facility 

A.2.e. Substandard Vessel or Facility 

Based upon the definition of substandard provided by International Maritime 

Organization Assembly Resolution A.466 (XII), a substandard vessel or facility is 

defined as any nonconforming vessel or facility whose hull, structure, machinery, or 

equipment is substantially below the standards required by U. S. law or international 

conventions, and whose deficiencies as a whole or individually endanger persons, 

property, or present an unreasonable risk to the marine environment. 

Conditions that could result in a vessel or facility being regarded as substandard 

include but are not limited to the following: 

• The absence of principal equipment or arrangement required by U. S. laws or 

international conventions (e.g., absence of required life boats, life preservers, 

fire hoses, or fire extinguishers); 

• Gross noncompliance of equipment or arrangement with relevant 

specifications of U. S. laws or international conventions (e.g., serious 

deficiencies of the lifesaving, firefighting, structural fire protection, steering, 

propulsion, communications, navigation, or cargo systems); 

• Substantial deterioration of the structure or its essential equipment (e.g., 

severely wasted hull, deck, frames, or hatch covers; or inoperative fire mains, 

inert gas systems, pollution prevention equipment);

B.1.

NOV/TICKETS

B.2. CLASS I

ADMINSTRATIVE 

CIVIL PENALTY

A vessel or facility is regarded as nonconforming when it fails to comply with one or 

more applicable requirements of U. S. laws, regulations, or international conventions. 

Noncompliance with operational standards required by U. S. law, or international 

convention (e.g., personnel-related factors such as inability of responsible parties to 

perform duties, properly conduct drills, or communicate emergency procedures). 

B. TYPES OF CIVIL PENALTIES

A Notice of Violation (NOV) is a formal, written notice of an apparent violation for 

which a predetermined monetary penalty is appropriate. In all cases, the issuance and 

final disposition will be considered part of the relevant safety record for use in future 

Coast Guard activities. 

The Class I Administrative Civil Penalty process is used when the issuance of a letter 

of warning (See Chapter C2 for guidance on LOWs) or NOV is not appropriate. 

These cases are adjudicated by the Coast Guard Hearing Office. In all cases, the final 

disposition will be considered part of the relevant safety record for use in future 

Coast Guard activities. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 3: CIVIL PENALTIES 

C3-3 

B.3. CLASS II

ADMINISTRATIVE 

CIVIL PENALTY

B.4. JUDICIAL

C.1. GENERAL C.1.a. Application of Civil Penalties 

C.1.b. Selection of Charged Parties 

C.1.c. Adjudication 

The Class II Administrative Civil Penalty process is used only for certain violations of 

the Federal Water Pollution Control Act as amended by the Oil Pollution Act (OPA) 

and Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act 

(CERCLA). It is typically pursued in egregious and willful violations of these statutes 

where the maximum penalty associated with a Class I Administrative Civil Penalty is 

deemed insufficient to meet enforcement goals and in cases where the Coast Guard 

wants to pursue other non-monetary requirements, such as the creation of an 

environmental compliance plan or other requirements that may be imposed by an 

Administrative Law Judge (ALJ). Class II Administrative Civil Penalty assessments 

may be made only by an ALJ using the procedures contained in 33 CFR Part 20. In 

all cases, the final disposition will be considered part of the relevant safety record for 

use in future Coast Guard activities. 

The Judicial Civil Penalty process is the presentation of all relevant evidence and facts 

surrounding a specific offense to Federal District Court Judge for adjudication. A 

Judicial Civil Penalty may be pursued for a wide variety of violations, but is usually 

reserved for egregious and willful violations where the maximum penalties associated 

with a Class I Administrative Civil Penalty is deemed insufficient to meet 

enforcement goals. In all cases, the final disposition will be considered part of the 

relevant safety record for use in future Coast Guard activities. 

C. CIVIL PENALTY PROCESS

The Captain of the Port (COTP), Officer in Charge Marine Inspection (OCMI) and 

Federal On Scene Coordinator (FOSC) should normally initiate the civil penalty 

assessment process for all major non-criminal violations, for repeat offenders, and 

any minor violations which are not corrected immediately by the responsible party, or 

any other time they deem appropriate given the circumstances of a particular case. 

Civil penalty enforcement actions should target those parties who can most 

effectively bring about compliance or a remedy and those who need to be deterred 

from committing future violations. For violations where several parties can with 

equal effectiveness bring about compliance or remedy, then civil penalty actions 

selected should target those parties whose failure to comply requires the greatest 

degree of correction. 

Civil penalties, other than more serious FWPCA/CERCLA violations, are 

adjudicated by the Coast Guard Hearing Office under 33 CFR 1.07 non-adversarial 

proceedings. FWPCA/CERCLA violations cases may be adjudicated by the Hearing 

Office as Class I Administrative Civil Penalty cases, adjudicated by Coast Guard 

Administrative Law Judges as Class II Administrative Civil Penalty cases under 33 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 3: CIVIL PENALTIES 

C3-4 

C.1.d. Letters of Undertaking / Surety Bonds for 

Foreign Vessels 

C.2. CIVIL 

PENALTY CASE

C.2.a. Initiation of Civil Penalty Cases 

C.2.b. Preparation of Civil Penalty Cases 

CFR 20 proceedings, or referred to the Department of Justice for prosecution as a 

Judicial Civil Penalty cases. 

Whenever a civil penalty case is pursued, the COTP, OCMI, or FOSC should 

normally require a Letter of Undertaking (LOU) or Surety Bond from the vessel 

owner, operator, or person in charge of a foreign vessel as a port state control 

measure to assure payment of any subsequently assessed penalty or fine. Included at 

the end of this chapter as Figure C3-1 is a standard LOU template. 

Information concerning apparent violations of federal law or regulation can be 

received from sources other than observing Coast Guard units. For example, local or 

other federal agency law enforcement personnel, or private citizens, may report to the 

Coast Guard the occurrence of an alleged reckless or negligent operation of a 

pleasure boat, or other vessel type. The district commander establishes policy 

regarding the scope and extent for the investigation of such reported incidents and 

establishes policy for processing civil penalty cases for their respective units. Upon 

the completion of an investigation by a Coast Guard unit and the preliminary 

conclusion that a violation did occur, appropriate documentation is prepared. All 

required entries shall be made into the Marine Information for Safety and Law 

Enforcement (MISLE) data system in accordance with the MISLE Investigations and 

Enforcement Process Guide. When an agency other than the Coast Guard conducts 

the investigation, that agency's investigative report should be forwarded as part of the 

civil penalty case and attached to the MISLE enforcement activity as correspondence. 

When an early determination is made that an investigation might be better conducted 

by another Coast Guard district, or unit of that district, and the other district has 

been consulted, the initial report and other information on the incident may be 

forwarded. 

Depending on the district commander’s established policy regarding the processing 

of civil penalty cases, the case will be prepared either at the unit or district level. All 

civil penalty cases shall be evaluated to determine whether there is sufficient evidence 

to establish a "prima facie" (i.e., evidence exists to prove all elements of the violation) 

civil penalty case. Care must be taken to ensure that all of the evidence in support of 

the case is present, i.e., the facts available for development of key conclusions should 

accompany those conclusions. If it is determined that a prima facie civil penalty case 

exists and it warrants assessment of a Class I Administrative Civil Penalty, the case 

should be prepared and submitted to the Coast Guard Hearing Office. These 

evaluations and submissions should be made in accordance with current program 

guidelines. The case may be closed any time prior to its forwarding to the Hearing 

Office; for example, this might occur with the issuance and acceptance of a Letter of 

Warning. If district policy requires civil penalty cases to be reviewed by the district 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 3: CIVIL PENALTIES 

C3-5 

C.2.c. Civil Penalty MISLE Enforcement Activity 

Contents 

C.2.d. Hearing Office Review 

C.3. HEARING 

OFFICE ACTION

C.3.a. General 

C.3.b. Notification 

program manager prior to submission to the Hearing Office, program managers 

should advise originating units of the disposition of their cases, including the reasons 

for the actions taken in each case. Prior violations by the party should be included in 

the case package. 

A Class I Administrative Civil Penalty enforcement activity shall be created in MISLE 

in accordance with the MISLE Investigations and Enforcement Process Guide. An 

enforcement activity can have any number of alleged violations. It may consist of 

information on several alleged violations (of various laws or regulations) occurring or 

observed at the same time, or on several similar alleged violations occurring over a 

period of time, but addressed by the single enforcement activity. A single 

enforcement activity should address a single party; cases against other liable parties 

for the same incident are required to be addressed by separate enforcement activities. 

The submitted Class I Administrative Civil Penalty case is examined by the Hearing 

Office. If the Hearing Office determines that there is not sufficient evidence to 

proceed, that there is any reason why penalty action may otherwise be inappropriate, 

or dismissed the case without prejudice, the case package and MISLE activity is 

returned to the submitting unit with a written statement of the reason for return or 

dismissal. The submitting unit can choose to either close the activity as “Closed – 

Administrative Action”, or to correct any deficiency and resubmit the case package 

and MISLE activity for further Hearing Office consideration. There may be other 

appropriate actions available to the submitting unit in disposition of the case (e.g., 

referral to the U.S. attorney as a criminal violation case). If the Hearing Office 

determines that no violation occurred and dismisses the case with prejudice, the case 

package will be returned to the submitting unit and the MISLE activity will be closed.

The below sections give an overview of the role of the Coast Guard Hearing Office 

in the Class I Administrative Civil Penalty process. They are provided for 

informational purposes and are not binding on the Coast Guard Hearing Office or 

any Coast Guard Hearing Officer. For a more detailed explanation of the role of the 

Coast Guard Hearing Office, see Commandant Instruction M16200.5 (series), Civil 

Penalty Hearing Officer Procedures. 

Parties to Class I Administrative Civil Penalty cases are provided written notice that 

civil penalty proceedings have commenced. The required notice will contain those 

items found in 33 CFR 1.07-20(b), including the amount of penalty that appears to be 

appropriate. No penalty will be assessed until the alleged violator has been provided 

opportunity to reply, and the Hearing Office has considered any such reply and it has 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 3: CIVIL PENALTIES 

C3-6 

C.3.c. Counsel / Party Representative 

C.3.d. In-Person Hearings 

C.3.e. Disclosure 

C.3.f. Witnesses 

been determined the violation(s) did occur. 

A party has the right to be represented by counsel at all stages of a Class I 

Administrative Civil Penalty proceeding. Once the Hearing Office is notified that 

counsel or some other person (e.g., agent, managing operator, employer, or associate) 

will provide representation for the party, this notice will be entered into the record in 

the case and all subsequent communications will be directed to that counsel or 

representative. 

An in-person hearing must be requested in writing by the party and must be

supported. Civil penalty hearings are open to the public (including the news media 

and Coast Guard personnel), space permitting, for the purpose of observation. No 

statements from, or disruptions by, such observers will be tolerated. The degree to 

which requests to be present is honored, given limited space or some other 

constraint, is at the discretion of the presiding hearing officer, or a senior supervising 

hearing officer. Portions of an in-person hearing may be closed if material of a 

confidential nature is to be offered or discussed. Participation by persons other than 

the party may be permitted (see 33 CFR 1.07-50 and 55). It is not necessary that the 

hearing officer decide a case at the close of an in-person hearing. The volume or 

nature of the party's submissions and testimony may require considerable time for 

complete consideration, or the party may request time to make additional written 

submissions, or it may be appropriate to permit the program manager to review and 

rebut. Also, the hearing officer may, at the close of the in-person hearing, state that a 

violation was shown to have occurred, and then give the party additional time to 

provide further information before deciding on an appropriate penalty. 

The hearing officer must ensure that the party has been fully afforded the 

opportunity to view the disclosable evidence and other substantive material in the 

party's case file. The party has a right to examine all materials in the case file and to 

have a copy of all written documents. This includes new evidence entered into the 

file after the party has been provided copies of the file or has otherwise been 

informed of the contents of the file. 

A party may request the assistance of the hearing officer in obtaining the appearance 

of a witness. If the hearing officer determines that the personal appearance of the 

witness may materially aid in the decision of the case, then an effort will be made to 

honor the request. Should the hearing officer decide that the appearance or 

statement of the witness is essential, but is unable to obtain either, the case can be 

remanded to the submitting unit for further investigation. If the hearing officer 

decides to deny the party's request, the party remains entitled to produce the witness 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 3: CIVIL PENALTIES 

C3-7 

C.3.g. Agency Participation 

C.3.h. Requests for Confidential Treatment 

C.3.i. Decisions 

C.3.j. Dismissals - Citations 

Individual citations in a case may be dismissed under one of the following 

circumstances: 

• The evidence does not convince the hearing officer that the cited violation, or 

other violation of which the party has had full and fair notice, did occur; or 

• The party to the case is an inappropriate party; or 

• There is an extraordinary situation in which an injustice would result if

penalty action, including a "warning," were taken. 

C.3.k. Dismissals - Cases 

by whatever means are available. 

Participation in an in-person hearing by a district program manager representative, 

unit representative, or some other government entity having an investigative, 

administrative, or other responsibility in a case may be permitted. Strict guidelines 

regarding procedures should be developed and explained completely to the agency 

and the party. The hearing officer will maintain complete control of the hearing at all 

times. 

Hearing officers should caution parties making requests for confidential treatment of 

their submissions that the hearing officer's decision to honor such a request is subject 

to review. Once the material is entered into the record, third parties can request 

disclosure, and the reviewing authority in the Coast Guard may determine that the 

material is subject to disclosure. Hearing officers will typically only accept material 

submitted with a request for confidential treatment after the party has been 

cautioned, and has reaffirmed the submission and the request for confidential 

treatment. 

Each decision (i.e., whether a violation did occur and, if so, what penalty is 

appropriate) made in a case must be in writing. Decisions are not generally required 

to contain specific and detailed finding of fact for all possible issues. However, the 

disputed issues pertinent to the case will typically be covered. The record in a case 

must contain the information that compels or persuades the findings. The decision 

can be recorded on "hearing notes," with copies provided for the party with the letter 

setting forth the decision, or written into the body of the letter itself. 

__________________________________________________________________ 

Cases may be dismissed if one of the above circumstances exists for each citation in 

the case, or there is an extraordinary situation in which an injustice would occur if the 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 3: CIVIL PENALTIES 

C3-8 

C.3.l. Warnings 

C.3.m. Appeals 

C.3.n. Reopening of Hearings 

C.4. REPORTS OF 

VIOLATIONS 

INVOLVING BOTH 

CIVIL AND CRIMINAL 

PENALTY PROVISIONS

Violations of certain statutes enforced by the Coast Guard entail both civil and 

criminal penalties. For example, 46 U.S.C. 2302 provides for the imposition of a civil 

penalty or criminal prosecution for grossly negligent operation of a vessel that 

endangers the life, limb, or property of any person. [NOTE: Discharges of oil or 

hazardous substances in quantities which may be harmful (see 33 U.S.C. 1321(b)(3)) 

and the failure to report such discharges immediately (see 33 U.S.C. 1321(b)(5)) are 

separate offenses.] When such violations are reported, the district commander shall 

determine whether or not the imposition of a criminal penalty is warranted. If the 

evidence is sufficient and the circumstances are such that a criminal penalty is

appropriate, the case shall be referred to the U.S. attorney for action. The district 

commander shall act on all reports of dual penalty violations as follows: 

• All reckless and negligent operation cases, whether or not death or serious 

injury are involved, shall be carefully evaluated to determine whether the 

circumstances and documentary evidence available in the case warrant referral 

to the U.S. attorney for criminal prosecution. 

• Flagrant cases or cases involving repeated offenses may be especially 

appropriate for referral to the U.S. attorney if the facts warrant such action. 

penalty case as a whole were to continue. For example, before coming to a decision 

on the facts in a case, a comparison of certain humanitarian factors (as they affect the 

party) with the need for completion of the penalty case may persuade the hearing 

officer to dismiss the case. All dismissals will be explained on the record. 

The issuance of warnings in Class I Administrative Civil Penalty cases is permitted, at 

the discretion of the Hearing Officer. The basis for a decision to give a warning in 

lieu of a monetary penalty should be explained on the record. 

Appeals of civil penalties are described in 33 CFR 1.07-70 and 1.07-75. Upon receipt 

of an appeal, the Hearing Office should provide a copy of the appeal and any 

supporting brief to the Coast Guard unit that submitted the case. The Coast Guard 

unit will have 30 days to submit comments; any comments made on an appeal should 

not include new evidence. All of the germane evidence should have been entered 

into the file before the decision was made. 

The basis for the reopening of a Class I Administrative Civil Penalty case is described 

in 33 CFR 1.07-80. The Coast Guard unit that submitted the case will be given the 

opportunity to file comments in opposition to the petition to reopen. 

• When cases are referred to the U.S. attorney and prosecution is declined, the 

district commander may, at his discretion, refer the case to the hearing officer 

for institution of administrative civil penalty proceedings.
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 3: CIVIL PENALTIES 

C3-9 

D.1. COAST GUARD 

RESPONSIBILITIES

D.2. CIVIL 

PENALTY 

ENFORCEMENT ACTION

D.3. CIVIL 

PENALTY 

ENFORCEMENT 

OPTIONS

The Commandant's policy is to vigorously pursue a program of measures to achieve 

the Congressional intent, expressed in Section 1321, that there should be "no

discharges of oil or hazardous substances into or upon the navigable waters of the 

United States, adjoining shorelines . . ." Discretion in making enforcement decisions 

should be exercised by the OCMI/COTP in referring cases and by the Hearing 

Office in deciding cases to best realize the purposes of the law. The minimum level 

of enforcement that shall be pursued is the issuance of a Letter of Warning in lieu of 

a civil penalty assessment. (See Chapter C2 for guidance on LOWs for discharges of 

oil) Evidence may warrant the imposition of a minimal civil penalty, but in any case 

the penalty should be strong enough to motivate owners and operators to take 

adequate measures to prevent recurrences. Commandant Instruction M5582.1 

(series), Notice of Violation User’s Manual, provides guidance on the issuance of 

NOVs for discharges of oil. In cases that the OCMI/COTP determines that an 

assessment of a civil penalty in an amount that exceeds the amounts authorized for 

issuance of a NOV may be appropriate, the case shall be pursued as a Class I 

Administrative Civil Penalty, Class II Administrative Civil Penalty or Judicial Civil 

Penalty as appropriate. It must be remembered, however, that in any case, the 

determination of the appropriate level of civil penalty enforcement must be based on 

the whole set of facts. While one factor bearing on the gravity of the violation may 

be slight, another might be serious enough to warrant a substantial penalty. For 

example, the fact that the amount spilled is extremely small may be offset by the 

careless conduct of the party. Conversely, a high level of care by the party may be 

offset by a large quantity discharged. 

D. CIVIL PENALTY AUTHORITY UNDER THE FWPCA, AS AMENDED

Under Section 1321 of the FWPCA, as amended, (33 U.S.C. 1321), the Coast Guard 

is responsible for ensuring that reports of discharge under Section 1321 are 

investigated, and authorizes that every proven violation may result in the assessment 

of a civil penalty. The OCMI/COTP is responsible for the investigation of 

discharges and referral of appropriate cases to the Coast Guard Hearing Office. The 

Hearing Office is responsible for administering cases fairly and impartially, in 

accordance with 33 CFR 1.07, and for issuing decisions based on the facts of the case 

and the applicable laws and regulations. Action taken by a state or municipality, or a 

federal agency other than the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), under 

Section 1321(b)(6)(B) does not obviate the authority for appropriate Coast Guard 

civil penalty action to be initiated. 

The Coast Guard is authorized to assess a civil penalty against the owner, operator, or 

person-in-charge of a vessel or facility from which oil or a hazardous substance was 

discharged, in violation of Section 1321(b)(3), except for discharges which are 

forwarded, by interagency agreement or understanding, to a U.S. attorney or the EPA 

for action. In every case in which there is substantial evidence that a violation 

occurred, civil penalty enforcement action shall be pursued. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 3: CIVIL PENALTIES 

C3-10 

D.4. PROPER 

PARTY 

DETERMINATION

D.4.a. Determining the Source 

D.4.b. Determining the Owner/Operator 

When a prohibited discharge is established, two questions must be asked: What is the 

source of the discharge? and, Who is the owner, operator, or person-in-charge of 

that source? As defined in Section 1321(a)(6) the "owner" or "operator" is any 

person owning, operating, or chartering by demise a vessel; or any person owning or 

operating an onshore or offshore facility. In many cases, there is more than one 

party subject to a penalty under the law. Strict constraints on the selection of a party 

may actually prevent Congressional and Coast Guard purposes from being served 

properly. While the civil penalty provisions of Section 1321(b)(6) are based on the 

principle of strict liability, there is room for discretion in determining the actionable 

source and the person to be considered the owner, operator, or person-in-charge of 

the source. 

Some time ago, the "conduit theory" was devised to assist in determining which 

vessel or facility, of a number of potentially actionable sources, could most 

appropriately be considered the discharge source for civil penalty purposes. For 

example, oil may be discharged from a source, flow across or through a facility or 

vessel of an otherwise innocent party, and enter the water. In such a case, the 

owner/operator of the source should normally be the actionable party in civil penalty 

action; the vessel/facility from which the discharge ultimately entered the water is 

viewed as a conduit only. When the evidence indicates that the facility or vessel 

across or through which the discharge flowed was not merely a passive conduit, 

identification of the actionable source is complicated. When two or more entities 

actively discharged oil or failed to take reasonable measures to prevent its entry into 

the water, any or all of them may be considered the source. The OCMI/COTP shall 

evaluate all available evidence, including causal factors and the capability for taking 

reasonable precautions, to determine the appropriate actionable source (i.e., the point 

of entry and/or the actual source). 

Once the actionable source has been identified, it may be necessary to determine 

which of several parties is the "owner" or "operator" for civil penalty purposes. 

Section 1321(b)(6) is a remedial provision intended to spur involved persons to adopt 

measures necessary for the prevention of oil and hazardous substances pollution by 

their vessels and facilities. By reaching the owner, operator, or the person-in-charge 

of a violating vessel or facility, Congress has provided a flexible means of reaching 

those persons capable of taking such measures. While the question of ownership is 

normally established easily, the intent of the law is not always served best by 

proceeding against the owner; sometimes, it is more appropriate for the operator of 

the vessel or facility to be charged. It is the Commandant's policy that environmental 

protection laws should be interpreted as broadly as possible, the terms "operator" and 

"person-in-charge" are recognized as including persons not having complete business 

control of a vessel or facility. Such persons may be considered proper parties if they 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 3: CIVIL PENALTIES 

C3-11 

D.4.c. OCMI/COTP Determination 

The decision as to the proper party in any particular case is vested in the discretion of 

the OCMI/COTP based on an evaluation of all the facts of that case. This discretion 

should be exercised in a manner which most reasonably and effectively serves the 

purposes of the law. The following factors should be considered: 

• The degree to which each involved party is responsible for the incident. 

• The degree to which each involved party is in a position to prevent future 

incidents. 

• The effect of economic incentives on various involved parties. 

• Particular care shall be exercised in identifying the owner, operator, or 

person-in-charge, in accordance with the guidance above. 

D. 5. CIVIL 

PENALTY ASSESSMENT 

UNDER SECTION 

1321(J)(1) 

D. 6. CIVIL 

PENALTY ASSESSMENT 

FOR MARINE 

SANITATION DEVICE 

(MSD) VIOLATIONS

exercise physical or operational control of a discharging vessel or facility. [NOTE: In 

cases involving multiple parties, where control of the vessel/facility is so fragmented 

as to preclude a finding that any one person is the operator or person-in-charge, the 

OCMI/COTP may proceed against the owner.] 

• In those cases where a pollutant reaches the water, via a passive conduit of 

the discharge, a civil penalty should normally be pursued against the owner, 

operator, or person-in-charge of the actual source of the discharge. 

During the investigation of oil pollution incidents, close attention shall be given to 

possible violations of the pollution prevention regulations as well as the discharge 

prohibition of the FWPCA, as amended. No violation should be regarded as minor 

when it has contributed to or will likely contribute to a discharge, is a repeat violation 

of the exact same offense within a 2-year period, or when there is no good faith 

effort on the part of the party to achieve rapid compliance. This should normally be 

reflected in the civil penalty amount recommended. If at all possible, cases involving 

a discharge of oil or hazardous substances as a result of a pollution prevention 

regulation violation should be processed simultaneously through civil penalty 

proceedings. While the size of the violator's business and the impact of a civil penalty 

on the ability of the owner/operator to remain in business must be considered in the 

assessment of penalties under Section 1321(b)(6), these are not required to be 

considered in the imposition of a civil penalty under Section 1321(j)(1); they may be 

considered at the discretion of the Hearing Office. 

In addressing violations of where Section 1322(j) authorizes the assessment of a civil 

penalty, the OCMI/COTP should seek to bring vessels into compliance with 

requirements. Recommendations made pursuant to 33 CFR 1.07-10 shall be

commensurate with the gravity of the violation and the need to ensure future 

compliance with the MSD regulations (33 CFR 159). 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 3: CIVIL PENALTIES 

C3-12 

FIGURE C3-1: Optional Standard Form Letter of Undertaking (LOU) 

Secretary of Homeland Security 

c/o Commander, U.S. Coast Guard Sector 

 (address) 

Re: (name of vessel, on or about [date], Location) 

 Applicable regulation or statute 

Dear Sir: 

In consideration of the United States of America refraining from withholding the clearance required by 

46 USC App. 91 of the [name of vessel], arresting the vessel or attaching any property belonging to the 

Owners of the vessel in connection with claims and actions arising out of alleged violations described 

above occurring within the navigable waters and the exclusive economic zone of the United States, and 

arising on or after [Date(s) of alleged violations] (hereafter referred to as the “alleged incident”). The 

undersigned, {Name of the Bound Party], hereby agrees: 

1. That [Name of agent or attorney-in-fact] as agent [or attorney in fact] for the Owner/[Name

of Bound Party] and operator [Name of Bound Party] shall accept delivery of correspondence 

for the Owner/[ Name of Bound Party] and operator [name of bound party] and service of 

any process on behalf of the Owner/[Name of Bound Party] and operator [name of bound 

party] in any case, action, administrative hearing, or proceeding related to or arising from

civil penalties for violations as generally identified above; that delivery to the agent or 

attorney-in-fact constitutes effective notice and service on the Owner/[Name of Bound Party] 

and operator [name of bound party]; 

2. To file, or cause to be filed, upon demand, a Claim and appearance by the Owner and/or 

operator of the vessel _______________ in any action brought against either or both of them

by the United States concerning the alleged violations, and to defend the vessel from any in 

rem claim asserted against it; 

3. In the event a final judgment (after appeal if any) is entered, in favor of the 

United States against the vessel ___________, or her Owner or Operator as a result of such 

action to pay and satisfy said judgment, plus interest and costs, up to and not exceeding

[Maximum amount of Civil Penalty that may be assessed], or any lesser amount settled 

between the parties, provided said settlement has been made with the written approval of 

[Name of Bound Party]; 

4. Upon written demand, to cause to be filed in said hearing or action, a bond 

in form and sufficiency of surety satisfactory to you, or to the Court, sufficient in amount not 

to exceed $[Maximum amount of civil penalty that may be assessed], including interest and 

costs, to secure your claim against the Owner and/or operator, and [name of vessel]in the 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 3: CIVIL PENALTIES 

C3-13 

aforesaid judicial action. In the event that the bond referred to in this paragraph is filed, the 

undersigned shall have no further obligation under Paragraph 3 above. 

This letter is to be binding whether the [name of vessel] be lost or not lost, in port or not in port, and is 

given without prejudice to all rights or defenses which the [name of vessel] and/or her Owner or 

Operator may have, none of which is to be regarded as waived, with the exception that the Owner and 

Operator agree that delivery to the agent identified in paragraph 1 above, of correspondence for the 

Owner/[name of Bound Party] and operator [name of bound party] will constitute effective notice to the 

Owner[Name of Bound Party] and operator [name of bound party], and that the Owner[Name of Bound 

Party] and operator [name of bound party] will not assert in any subsequent hearing or action any 

alleged defects in notice or service of process issued and served in accordance with this undertaking. 

This letter does not constitute an admission of liability by the vessel or its Owner/[Name of Bound 

Party] and operator [name of bound party]. 

This letter is also written entirely without prejudice to any claims and rights the United States of 

America may have pursuant to any applicable Certificate of Financial Responsibility (“COFR”) 

pertaining to the vessel, none of which claims and rights are to be regarded as waived or discharged. 

Owner [name of bound party] warrants that it owns the vessel. Operator [name of bound party] agrees 

that it may be considered an operator of the vessel under applicable United States law. 

If no penalty is assessed, or no action is filed in the aforesaid Court within a period of three (3) years 

from the date of hereof, this letter shall become null and void. If the Owner [name of bound party] fails 

to appear as required by paragraph 2, or fails to waive objections to jurisdiction, then the undersigned 

association agrees to pay to the United States the full amount of this letter of undertaking. 

It is understood and agreed that the execution of this letter by (name of law firm) on behalf of the 

Undersigned [Name of Bound Party Underwriter or P&I Club] shall not be construed as binding upon 

(name of law firm) but is binding only upon the undersigned [Name of Bound Party Underwriter or P&I 

Club]. 

 Sincerely,

(Name of Bound Party Underwriter or P&I Club) 

 By: (firm)

 ____________________________________ 

 (Name of attorney) 

As Attorney in Fact for the above limited 

 Purposes only per (telex, telefax, letter) 

Authority from Name of Bound Party (Underwriter or P& I 

Club) dated __________________. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 3: CIVIL PENALTIES 

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL

Volume V: Investigations and Enforcement

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

Chapter Four: 

Suspension and Revocation
 

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 4: SUSPENSION AND REVOCATION 

C4-i 

Table of Contents 

A. Introduction............................. 1

A.1. GENERAL .........................................................................................................................................................................1

A.2. AUTHORITY; 46 USC CHAPTER 77...................................................................................................................................1

A.2.a. 46 USC 7703(1); Violation of Law/Regulation, Misconduct or Negligence ............................................................1

A.2.b. 46 USC 7703(2); Conviction ....................................................................................................................................2

A.2.c. 46 USC 7703(3); NDRA Conviction.........................................................................................................................2

A.2.d. 46 USC 7703(4); Act of Incompetence .....................................................................................................................2

A.2.e. 46 USC 7703(5); Security Risk.................................................................................................................................2

A.2.f. 46 USC 7704(b); Dangerous Drug Law Conviction .................................................................................................2

A.2.g. 46 USC 7704(c); Dangerous Drug Use....................................................................................................................3

A.2.h. 46 USC 7702(d)(1); Temporary Suspension ............................................................................................................3

A.3. DEFINITIONS ....................................................................................................................................................................3

A.3.a. Merchant Mariners' Credentials (MMCs)................................................................................................................3

A.3.b. Mariner.....................................................................................................................................................................3

A.3.c. Suspension and Revocation (S&R) Proceedings ......................................................................................................3

A.3.d. Dangerous Drugs.....................................................................................................................................................4

A.3.e. Cure ..........................................................................................................................................................................4

A.3.f. Conviction .................................................................................................................................................................4

A.3.g. Security Risk .............................................................................................................................................................4

A.4. JURISDICTION...................................................................................................................................................................5

A.4.a. Acting Under Authority of a MMC...........................................................................................................................5

A.4.b. Use of a Dangerous Drug/Violation of Dangerous Drug Law.................................................................................6

A.5. JURISDICTION AND PILOTS ...............................................................................................................................................6

A.6. DISCIPLINARY CONCERNS................................................................................................................................................7

A.7. EQUAL ACCESS TO JUSTICE ACT .....................................................................................................................................7

A.8. MISLE WANTED LIST......................................................................................................................................................7

A.8.a. MISLE Enforcement Activity Status and Prompt Date.............................................................................................8

A.8.b. Removing Mariners from the MISLE Wanted List....................................................................................................8

A.8.c. MISLE Entries after Removal from Wanted List ......................................................................................................9

A.8.d. Release of MISLE Wanted List .................................................................................................................................9

A.9. COMMANDANT (CG-5451) ASSISTANCE..........................................................................................................................9

B. Complaints and Answers.................. 10

B.1. INTRODUCTION...............................................................................................................................................................10

B.2. COMPLAINT....................................................................................................................................................................10

B.2.a. Caption...................................................................................................................................................................10

B.2.b. Introductory Paragraph .........................................................................................................................................10

B.2.c. Statutory and Regulatory Authority........................................................................................................................10

B.2.d. Allegations..............................................................................................................................................................11

B.3. JURISDICTIONAL ALLEGATIONS .....................................................................................................................................11

B.4. FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS ................................................................................................................................................12

B.5. SAMPLE FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS...................................................................................................................................13

B.5.a. Misconduct .............................................................................................................................................................13

B.5.a.1. Failure To Perform Duty.................................................................................................................................13

B.5.a.2. Failure To Perform Duty By Reason Of Intoxication......................................................................................14

B.5.a.3. Disobedience Of A Lawful Command..............................................................................................................14

B.5.a.4. Assault/Assault And Battery ............................................................................................................................15

B.5.a.5. Desertion .........................................................................................................................................................15
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 4: SUSPENSION AND REVOCATION 

C4-ii 

B.5.a.6. Theft And Robbery...........................................................................................................................................16

B.5.a.7. Failure To Account..........................................................................................................................................16

B.5.a.8. Possession Of Alcoholic Beverages.................................................................................................................16

B.5.a.9. Possession, Use, Sale, or Association With Dangerous Drugs .......................................................................17

B.5.a.10. Failure To Respond To Summons Or Subpoena............................................................................................18

B.5.a.11. Harassment Of Passengers............................................................................................................................18

B.5.a.12. Sexual Harassment ........................................................................................................................................18

B.5.a.13. Failure of Master to Stop Sexual Harassment...............................................................................................19

B.5.a.14. Improper Treatment Of Crew........................................................................................................................19

B.5.a.15. Smuggling Or Failure To Declare Dutiable Merchandise In Domestic Or Foreign Ports...........................20

B.5.a.16. Stowaways/Aiding Illegal Entry Of Aliens.....................................................................................................20

B.5.a.17. Failure to Join ...............................................................................................................................................21

B.5.a.18. Fraudulent Applications................................................................................................................................21

B.5.a.19. Absence Without Leave (AWOL) and Absence Over Leave (AOL)................................................................22

B.5.a.20. Refusal to Submit to a Required Drug Test ...................................................................................................23

B.5.b. Violation Of Law Or Regulation ............................................................................................................................24

B.5.b.1. Failure to Take Action to Stop Sexual Harassment.........................................................................................24

B.5.b.2. Failure To Report A Sexual Offense................................................................................................................25

B.5.b.3. Sexual Abuse....................................................................................................................................................25

B.5.b.4. Possession Of A Dangerous Weapon Or Explosive Compound ......................................................................26

B.5.b.5. Possession Or Selling Of A Switchblade Knife................................................................................................27

B.5.b.6. Use Of Alcoholic Beverages............................................................................................................................27

B.5.b.7. Damaging Vessel, Stores, Or Cargo................................................................................................................28

B.5.b.8. Resisting Coast Guard Personnel In Performance Of Duty............................................................................28

B.5.b.9. Mutiny And Conspiracy To Commit Mutiny....................................................................................................28

B.5.b.10. Unlawful Killing Of Another On Board Documented Vessels.......................................................................29

B.5.c. Negligence ..............................................................................................................................................................29

B.5.d. Incompetence..........................................................................................................................................................30

B.5.e. Dangerous Drug Offenses ......................................................................................................................................30

B.5.e.1. Use or Addiction to Dangerous Drugs ............................................................................................................31

B.5.e.2. Conviction of a Dangerous Drug Law.............................................................................................................31

B.5.e.3. Investigating Officer's Discretion (Marijuana Convictions) ...........................................................................32

B.5.f. Conviction of an Offense Preventing Issuance/Renewal of MMC...........................................................................32

B.5.g. Conviction of a NDRA Offense...............................................................................................................................33

B.5.h. Security Risk ...........................................................................................................................................................33

B.6. SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES..............................................................................................................................................34

B.6.a. Oil Pollution...........................................................................................................................................................34

B.7. OPTIONS FOR RESPONDENTS ..........................................................................................................................................34

B.8. RESPONDENT’S RIGHTS..................................................................................................................................................35

B.9. PROPOSED ORDER ..........................................................................................................................................................35

B.9.a. Proposed Order for Drug Use/Addiction Cases.....................................................................................................36

B.9.b. Proposed Order for Drug Conviction Cases..........................................................................................................36

B.9.c. Proposed Order for Drug Test Refusal Cases........................................................................................................37

B.9.d. Proposed Order for Misconduct for the Use, Possession, or Association with Dangerous Drugs ........................37

B.9.e. Proposed Order for Fraudulent Application Cases................................................................................................38

B.9.f. Proposed Order for NDRA Convictions..................................................................................................................38

B.9.g. Proposed Order for Convictions Precluding Issuance of MMC.............................................................................39

B.9.h. Proposed Order for Being a Threat to Safety or Security of a Vessel or Structure................................................39

B.10. PROPOSED DATES & LOCATION ...................................................................................................................................39

B.10.a. Change Of Venue Or Time ...................................................................................................................................39

B.11. ADDRESS......................................................................................................................................................................39

B.12. SERVING THE COMPLAINT............................................................................................................................................40

B.12.a. Temporary Suspension Complaint........................................................................................................................40
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 4: SUSPENSION AND REVOCATION 

C4-iii 

B.12.b. Time Limitations for Serving Complaints.............................................................................................................40

B.12.c. Service of Complaints Considered Complete .......................................................................................................40

B.13. FILING WITH DOCKET CENTER .....................................................................................................................................41

B.14. AMENDED COMPLAINT.................................................................................................................................................41

B.15. COMPLAINT AND ANSWER FORMS ...............................................................................................................................41

B.15.a. Complaint Forms..................................................................................................................................................41

B.15.b. Answer Forms.......................................................................................................................................................41

B.16. TEMPORARY SUSPENSION COMPLAINT FORMS.............................................................................................................42

C. Procedures Prior To Hearing............. 42

C.1. REGULATIONS ................................................................................................................................................................42

C.2. FIELD REQUEST FOR MARINER'S PRIOR RECORD ("MERMARPER") ...........................................................................42

C.3. REVIEW OF INVESTIGATIVE CASE FILES ........................................................................................................................42

C.4. ORGANIZATION OF EVIDENCE........................................................................................................................................43

C.5. ASSIGNMENT OF AN ALJ................................................................................................................................................43

C.6. SCHEDULING ORDER ......................................................................................................................................................43

C.7. SUMMARY DECISIONS. ...................................................................................................................................................43

C.8. MANDATORY DISCOVERY ..............................................................................................................................................43

C.9. OTHER DISCOVERY ........................................................................................................................................................44

C.10. PREHEARING CONFERENCES AND STIPULATIONS.........................................................................................................44

C.10.a. Authority For Prehearing Conferences................................................................................................................44

C.10.b. Discussions At Prehearing Conferences..............................................................................................................44

C.10.c. Record Of Prehearing Conference .......................................................................................................................45

C.11. DEPOSITIONS................................................................................................................................................................45

C.11.a. Who May Take Depositions..................................................................................................................................45

C.11.b. Requests For Depositions.....................................................................................................................................45

C.11.c. Procedure .............................................................................................................................................................46

C.11.d. Objections ............................................................................................................................................................46

C.11.e. Videotaped Depositions........................................................................................................................................47

C.12. NOTIFICATION TO OTHER AGENCIES ...........................................................................................................................47

C.13. ISSUANCE OF SUBPOENAS ............................................................................................................................................47

C.14. WITHDRAWAL OF COMPLAINT PRIOR TO HEARING .....................................................................................................47

C.15. PROCEDURES IN LIEU OF A HEARING ..........................................................................................................................47

C.15.a. Letters of Warning................................................................................................................................................48

C.15.b. Voluntary Deposit Of MMCs For Mental Or Physical Incompetence .................................................................48

C.15.c. Mariners Deemed Incompetent Who Do Not Enter Into A Voluntary Deposit.....................................................48

C.15.d. Voluntary Deposit Of MMCs For Addiction To Dangerous Drugs As A Cause Of Incompetence ......................48

C.15.d.1. Voluntary Deposits In Drug Investigations...................................................................................................49

C.15.d.2. Acceptance Of Voluntary Deposits................................................................................................................49

C.15.e. Voluntary Deposit Of MMCs For Alcoholism As A Cause Of Incompetence.......................................................49

C.15.e.1. Voluntary Deposits In Alcohol Abuse Investigations.....................................................................................50

C.15.e.2. Acceptance Of Voluntary Deposits................................................................................................................50

C.15.f. Written Agreement ................................................................................................................................................51

C.15.g. Limiting Conditions For Voluntary Deposits.......................................................................................................51

C.15.h. Disposition Of Deposited MMCs .........................................................................................................................51

C.15.i. Return Of MMCs...................................................................................................................................................51

C.15.i.1. Return Where Drug Use/Abuse Was Cause Of Incompetence .......................................................................51

C.15.i.2. Return Where Alcohol Use/Abuse Was Cause Of Incompetence ...................................................................52

C.15.j. Acceptance Of Medical Reports............................................................................................................................52

C.16. GOOD-FAITH DEPOSITS................................................................................................................................................52

C.17. VOLUNTARY SURRENDER ............................................................................................................................................53
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 4: SUSPENSION AND REVOCATION 

C4-iv 

D. Defaults................................ 54

D.1. INTRODUCTION ..............................................................................................................................................................54

D.2. REGULATIONS ................................................................................................................................................................54

D.3. WHEN TO FILE A DEFAULT MOTION ..............................................................................................................................54

D.4. THE DEFAULT MOTION ..................................................................................................................................................54

D.5. RESPONDENT’S RESPONSE .............................................................................................................................................54

D.6. PROOF OF SERVICE OF MOTION FOR DEFAULT...............................................................................................................54

D.7. ORDER ...........................................................................................................................................................................55

D.8. SETTING ASIDE DEFAULTS.............................................................................................................................................55

D.9. FAILURE TO APPEAR AT HEARING..................................................................................................................................55

D.10. AUTOMATIC DISMISSAL OF COMPLAINT ......................................................................................................................55

E. Settlement Agreements................... 55

E.1. INTRODUCTION...............................................................................................................................................................55

E.2. REGULATIONS ................................................................................................................................................................56

E.3. WHEN TO FILE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENTS ...................................................................................................................56

E.4. SETTLEMENT TYPES .......................................................................................................................................................56

E.4.a. Drug Use/Addiction................................................................................................................................................56

E.4.a.1. Amending Standard Drug Use Settlement Agreement.....................................................................................57

E.4.b. Drug Conviction and Misconduct for Use, Possession, or Association .................................................................57

E.4.c. Alcohol Use/Addiction............................................................................................................................................58

E.4.d. Mitigated Sanction With Conditions.......................................................................................................................58

E.4.e. Mitigated Sanction..................................................................................................................................................58

E.5. EXTENSION OF AGREEMENT ...........................................................................................................................................59

E.6. FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH AGREEMENT.......................................................................................................................59

E.7. COMPLYING WITH AGREEMENT.....................................................................................................................................59

F. Hearings................................ 59

F.1. LEGAL ASSISTANCE........................................................................................................................................................59

F.2. HEARING COSTS .............................................................................................................................................................60

F.3. WITNESS FEES ................................................................................................................................................................60

F.4. PREHEARING INTERVIEWS ..............................................................................................................................................60

F.5. EXPEDITED HEARINGS ....................................................................................................................................................60

F.5.a. Pre-hearing Conference .........................................................................................................................................60

F.6. DECORUM.......................................................................................................................................................................61

F.7. PRODUCTION OF MMCS.................................................................................................................................................61

F.8. OFFENSES .......................................................................................................................................................................61

F.8.a. Dismissal ................................................................................................................................................................61

F.8.b. Amendment of Complaint at Hearing.....................................................................................................................61

F.9. OPENING STATEMENTS ...................................................................................................................................................61

F.9.a. By the IO.................................................................................................................................................................61

F.9.b. Opening Statement in Negligence Cases................................................................................................................62

F.9.c. By/On Behalf of the Respondent .............................................................................................................................62

F.10. EVIDENCE .....................................................................................................................................................................62

F.10.a. Prima Facie Evidence ..........................................................................................................................................62

F.10.b. Standard Of Care in Negligence Cases................................................................................................................63

F.10.c. Presumption of Drug Use .....................................................................................................................................63

F.11. OFFICIAL MARINE RECORDS.........................................................................................................................................63

F.11.a. Shipping Articles, Form CG-705A, 735T, Or Equivalent.....................................................................................63

F.11.b. Official Logbooks.................................................................................................................................................64

F.11.c. Other Logbooks ....................................................................................................................................................64
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 4: SUSPENSION AND REVOCATION 

C4-v 

F.11.d. Use Of Foreign Records.......................................................................................................................................64

F.12. OFFICIAL NOTICE..........................................................................................................................................................65

F.13. WRITTEN TESTIMONY...................................................................................................................................................65

F.14. EXAMINATION OF WITNESSES......................................................................................................................................65

F.14.a. Preliminary Examination .....................................................................................................................................65

F.14.b. Direct Examination ..............................................................................................................................................65

F.14.c. Cross-Examination ...............................................................................................................................................66

F.14.d. Re-cross And Redirect Examination.....................................................................................................................66

F.14.e. Respondent's Rebuttal in Negligence Cases .........................................................................................................66

F.14.f. ALJ's Examination/Excusal Of The Witness..........................................................................................................67

F.14.g. Medical Evidence In Incompetence Cases ...........................................................................................................67

F.15. CONTINUANCES AND ADJOURNMENTS .........................................................................................................................67

F.16. DISPOSITION OF MMCS WHEN REVOCATION IS STAYED PENDING CURE ....................................................................67

F.17. MOTION TO DISMISS.....................................................................................................................................................68

F.18. RESPONDENT ACTIONS. ................................................................................................................................................68

F.19. REBUTTAL. ...................................................................................................................................................................68

F.20. CLOSING ARGUMENTS ..................................................................................................................................................69

F.21. ARGUMENTS IN MITIGATION OR AGGRAVATION..........................................................................................................69

F.22. PROPOSED FINDINGS.....................................................................................................................................................69

F.23. ORAL DECISIONS ..........................................................................................................................................................69

F.24. DECISION & ORDER......................................................................................................................................................70

F.25. ORDERS INCLUDING A SPECIFIC PROBATIONARY PERIOD. ............................................................................................70

G. Post-Hearing Procedures................. 71

G.1. REVIEWING THE CASE ...................................................................................................................................................71

G.2. COMPLETED CASE FILE..................................................................................................................................................71

G.3. NOTIFYING NMC OF PERSONNEL ACTIONS...................................................................................................................71

G.4. DEPOSIT OF MMCS AFTER SUSPENSION .......................................................................................................................73

G.5. DISPOSITION OF MMCS AFTER REVOCATION ...............................................................................................................73

G.6. REOPENING A HEARING .................................................................................................................................................73

G.6.a. Added Evidence......................................................................................................................................................73

G.6.b. Setting Aside Conviction ........................................................................................................................................74

G.6.c. Proof of Cure After Revocation Due to Drug Use..................................................................................................74

H. Appeal Process.......................... 74

H.1. INTRODUCTION ..............................................................................................................................................................74

H.2. REGULATIONS ................................................................................................................................................................74

H.3. WHEN AND WHERE TO FILE AN APPEAL. ......................................................................................................................74

H.4. WHAT CAN BE APPEALED .............................................................................................................................................74

H.5. STEPS TO FILING AN APPEAL. ........................................................................................................................................75

H.6. THE APPELLATE PROCESS..............................................................................................................................................75

H.7. APPEAL TO THE NTSB ..................................................................................................................................................76

H.8. APPEAL TO THE FEDERAL COURT..................................................................................................................................76

H.9. STAY OF DECISION AND ORDER OF ALJ DURING APPEAL TO COMMANDANT................................................................76

H.10. STAY OF DECISION ON APPEAL OF COMMANDANT DURING APPEAL TO THE NTSB....................................................77

H.11. SERVICE OF SANCTION WHILE ON APPEAL. .................................................................................................................77 

FIGURE C4-1: Notice of Suspension/Revocation ................................................................................................................78

FIGURE C4-2: Lost Credential Affidavit.............................................................................................................................79
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 4: SUSPENSION AND REVOCATION 

C4-vi 

FIGURE C4-3: Temporary Merchant Mariner’s Document in accordance with 46 CFR 5.707...........................................80

FIGURE C4-4: Temporary Merchant Mariner’s Document in accordance with 46 CFR 5.715...........................................81

FIGURE C4-5: Common Witness Objections (see: Trial Objections Handbook for more information)..............................82
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 4: SUSPENSION AND REVOCATION 

C4-1 

A.1. GENERAL

A.2. AUTHORITY;

46 USC CHAPTER 

77 

A.2.a. 46 USC 7703(1); Violation of Law/Regulation, 

Misconduct or Negligence 

A. INTRODUCTION

Violations of statutes and regulations enforced by the Coast Guard can result in the 

initiation of criminal or civil penalty action against the person responsible for 

committing the violation and/or the initiation of administrative action against Coast 

Guard issued merchant mariner credentials (MMCs). Enforcement tools available to 

the OCMI are discussed in Chapter C1 and procedures for processing civil penalty 

violations are discussed in Chapter C3 of this manual. This chapter provides policy 

guidance concerning the suspension and revocation (S&R) process and includes 

discussions of pre-hearing actions, complaints, answers, settlement agreements, 

hearing presentation, and post-hearing actions. Alternative actions concerning 

MMCs, including voluntary surrender agreements, voluntary deposit agreements, and 

good-faith deposits are also discussed. Letters of Warning are discussed in Chapter 

C2 of this manual. 

The basic authority to initiate S&R proceedings is derived from Title 46, United 

States Code, Chapter 77. 46 USC 7703 establishes the bases for S&R proceedings 

and authorizes S&R action against a mariner who, while acting under the authority of 

his/her MMC(s) commits: a violation of a law or regulation intended to promote 

marine safety or to protect navigable waters, an act of misconduct, or negligence. 

The statute further authorizes S&R action if a holder of a MMC committed an act of 

incompetence relating to the operation of a vessel, was convicted of an offense that 

would prevent the issuance or renewal of the MMC or is a threat to the safety or 

security of a vessel or a structure located within or adjacent to the marine 

environment. Moreover, the statute authorizes S&R action if a holder of a MMC was 

convicted an offense listed in section 205(a)(3)(A) or (B) of the National Driver 

Register Act of 1982 (NDRA) (49 USC 30304) within 3 years of the initiation of a 

relevant S&R proceeding. At the same time, 46 USC 7704 authorizes S&R action 

against the holder of a MMC who has been convicted of a dangerous drug law 

violation, or has been shown to be a user of, or addicted to the use of, dangerous 

drugs. 46 USC 7702(d)(1) authorizes the Coast Guard to temporarily suspend a 

mariner’s MMC for various offenses discussed below. The Coast Guard also has 

authority to initiate S&R proceedings against a MMC held by civil service or contract 

crewmember when possession of the MMC was a condition of employment, i.e. an 

individual hired to serve on a public vessel on the condition that he/she holds a 

MMC. This authority is set forth in Memorandums of Agreement with the 

Commander, Military Sealift Command (MSC), and the U.S. Army Corps of 

Engineers (ACOE) (see MSM Volume X). 

46 USC 7703(1) authorizes S&R action against a mariner’s MMC(s) if, while acting 

under the authority of the MMC(s), the mariner commits an act of misconduct, 

negligence, or a violation of law or regulation which is intended to promote marine 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 4: SUSPENSION AND REVOCATION 

C4-2 

A.2.b. 46 USC 7703(2); Conviction 

A.2.c. 46 USC 7703(3); NDRA Conviction 

46 USC 7703(3) authorizes S&R action if the holder of a MMC was convicted of an 

offense listed in section 205(a)(3)(A) or (B) of the NDRA of 1982 (49 USC 30304) 

within 3 years of initiation of S&R proceedings. Offenses listed in section

205(a)(3)(A) or (B) of the NDRA are: 

• Operation of a motor vehicle while under the influence of, or while impaired 

by alcohol or dangerous drugs; 

• Traffic violation(s) arising in connection with fatal traffic accidents; 

• Traffic violation(s) arising in connection with reckless driving; or 

• Traffic violation(s) arising in connection with racing on the highways. 

A.2.d. 46 USC 7703(4); Act of Incompetence 

A.2.e. 46 USC 7703(5); Security Risk 

A.2.f. 46 USC 7704(b); Dangerous Drug Law Conviction 

safety or to protect navigable waters. 

46 USC 7703(2) authorizes S&R action if the holder of a MMC was convicted of an 

offense that would prevent the issuance or renewal of the MMC. The Commandant 

considers convictions for offenses detailed in 46 CFR 5.59 and 5.61 to be convictions 

that would preclude the issuance or renewal of MMCs. The Commandant also 

considers a conviction for an offense listed in tables 46 CFR 10.201(h) or 46 

CFR12.02-04(c), to be a conviction that would prevent the issuance or renewal of a 

MMC. See section B.9 for guidance on appropriate sanctions.

See section B.9 for guidance on appropriate sanctions. 

46 USC 7703(4) authorizes S&R action if the holder of a MMC has committed an act 

of incompetence related to the operation of a vessel. Incompetence is based on the 

inability of a mariner to perform the duties required of his/her MMC(s). The 

inability to perform may be due to professional deficiencies, physical disability, 

and/or mental incapacity.

46 USC 7703(5) authorizes S&R action if the holder of a MMC is a security risk that 

poses a threat to the safety or security of a vessel or a structure located within or 

adjacent to the marine environment. See section B.9 for guidance on appropriate 

sanctions. 

46 USC 7704(b) authorizes S&R action against the holder of a MMC who, within 10 

years of the initiation of S&R proceedings, has been convicted of violating a 

dangerous drug law of the United States or of a State. The statute authorizes the 

suspension or revocation of the mariner’s MMC for such violations after the offense 

is found proved at a hearing. See section E for guidance on use of settlement 

agreements and section B.9 for guidance on appropriate sanctions. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 4: SUSPENSION AND REVOCATION 

C4-3 

A.2.g. 46 USC 7704(c); Dangerous Drug Use 

A.2.h. 46 USC 7702(d)(1); Temporary Suspension 

46 USC 7702(d)(1) authorizes the Coast Guard to temporarily suspend a mariner’s 

MMC, for not more than 45 days, if certain conditions exist. In temporary 

suspension cases, the mariner must perform a safety sensitive function on a vessel 

and there must be probable cause to believe that the mariner: 

• Has while acting under the authority of that MMC, performed the safety 

sensitive function while in violation of law or regulation regarding the use of 

alcohol or dangerous drugs; 

• Has been convicted an offense that would prevent the issuance or renewal of 

the MMC. The Commandant considers convictions for offenses detailed in 

46 CFR 5.59 and 5.61 to be convictions that would preclude the issuance or

renewal of MMCs. The Commandant also considers a conviction for an 

offense listed in tables 46 CFR 10.201(h) or 46 CFR12.02-04(c) to be a 

conviction that would prevent the issuance or renewal of a MMC; 

• Has been convicted an offense listed in section 205(a)(3)(A) or (B) of the 

NDRA (49 USC 30304) within 3 years of the initiation of S&R proceedings; 

or 

• Is a security risk that poses a threat to the safety or security of a vessel or a 

public or commercial structure located within or adjacent to the marine 

environment. 

A.3. DEFINITIONS A.3.a. Merchant Mariners' Credentials (MMCs) 

A.3.b. Mariner 

A.3.c. Suspension and Revocation (S&R) Proceedings 

46 USC 7704(c) authorizes S&R action against the holder of a MMC who has been a 

user of, or addicted to a dangerous drug. The statute requires that the MMC be 

revoked, unless the mariner is cured of his drug use or addiction. See section E for 

guidance on use of settlement agreements and section B.9 for guidance on 

appropriate sanctions. 

See section F.4 for guidance on expedited hearings. 

Any license, Certificate of Registry (COR), STCW endorsement, or Merchant 

Mariner Document (MMD) issued by the Coast Guard which serves as the 

qualification document for all merchant mariners sailing on U.S. flag vessels. 

Any person who has been issued a MMC by the Coast Guard. 

Administrative proceedings against MMCs issued by the Coast Guard that afford an 

opportunity for an oral, fact-finding hearing before an Administrative Law Judge 

(ALJ) under the authority of 46 USC Chapter 77 as implemented in Title 33, Code of 

Federal Regulations, Part 20 (33 CFR 20) and 46 CFR Part 5. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 4: SUSPENSION AND REVOCATION 

C4-4 

A.3.d. Dangerous Drugs 

A.3.e. Cure 

46 USC 7704 requires the MMC of an individual who is a user of, or addicted to a 

dangerous drugs to be revoked unless the individual can demonstrate cure. Cure has 

been defined in Commandant Decisions on Appeal (CDOA) 2535 (SWEENEY), 

2634 (BARRETTA), and 2638 (PASQUARELLA). An individual is considered 

cured if: 

• He/she successfully completes an accredited drug abuse rehabilitation 

program designed to eliminate physical and psychological dependence. This 

is interpreted to mean a program certified by a governmental agency, such as 

a state drug/alcohol abuse administration, or in the alternative, certified by an 

accepted independent professional association, such as the Joint Commission 

on Accreditation of Health Care Organizations (JCAHO); and 

• He/she demonstrates a complete non-association with drugs for a minimum 

of one year following the successful completion of the drug abuse 

rehabilitation program. This includes participation in an active drug abuse 

monitoring program which incorporates random, unannounced drug testing 

during that year; and 

A.3.f. Conviction 

A.3.g. Security Risk 

A mariner is considered a security risk if: 

• The mariner has a disqualifying criminal offense, as described in 49 CFR 

1572.103; 

• The mariner has been adjudicated as lacking mental capacity or committed to 

A narcotic drug, a controlled substance, or a controlled substance analog as defined 

in section 102 of the Comprehensive Drug Abuse and Control Act of 1970 (21 

U.S.C. 802).

• A Medical Review Officer (MRO) has determined that the mariner is drugfree and that the risk of subsequent use of dangerous drugs is sufficiently low 

to justify the mariner’s return to work. 

An individual has been found guilty by judgment or plea by a court of record of the 

U.S., the District of Columbia, or any State or territory of the U.S. of a criminal 

felony or misdemeanor or of an offense listed in section 205 of the NDRA. For the 

purposes of 46 USC 7703 or 7704, the Coast Guard considers an individual as having 

received a conviction if the Court action is based on a plea of guilty or no contest or 

involves deferred adjudication or the imposition of a requirement to attend classes, 

make contributions of time or money, receive treatment, submit to any manner of 

probation or supervision, or forgo appeal of the finding of the trial court. The Coast 

Guard does not consider the conviction expunged without proof that the 

expungement is due to the conviction's having been in error. See CDOA 2608 

(SHEPHERD). 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 4: SUSPENSION AND REVOCATION 

C4-5 

a mental institution, as described in 49 CFR 1572.109; 

• The individual is included in databases or watchlists relevant to determining 

whether an individual poses a security threat; 

• The Department of Homeland Security determines or suspects the mariner of 

being a threat to national security; transportation security, or of terrorism. 

A.4.

JURISDICTION

Jurisdiction to initiate S&R action against a MMC is established by either the 

individual being the holder of a MMC issued by the Coast Guard, or by the individual 

acting under the authority of a Coast Guard issued MMC. The offenses for which 

the Coast Guard must establish that the mariner was acting under the authority of his 

or her MMC at the time of the offense are: 

• A violation or a failure to comply with a provision of, or regulation issued 

under, Subtitle II of Title 46 USC; or a violation of or failure to comply with 

any law or regulation intended to promote marine safety or to protect 

navigable waters; or 

• An act of misconduct; or 

• An act of negligence. 

The offenses for which the Coast Guard has jurisdiction to initiate S&R proceedings 

against a mariner’s MMC simply because the individual is a holder of a Coast Guard 

issued MMC are: 

• A conviction of an offense that would prevent the issuance or renewal of the 

MMC; or 

• Within 3 years of the initiation of S&R proceedings, a mariner was convicted 

of an offense listed in section 205(a)(3)(A) or (B) of the NDRA (49 USC 

30304); or 

• An act of incompetence relating to the operation of a vessel; or 

• The mariner is a security risk that poses a threat to the safety or security of a 

vessel or a structure located within or adjacent to the marine environment; or 

• The mariner has been a user of, or addicted to dangerous drugs; or 

A.4.a. Acting Under Authority of a MMC 

The above list identifies major categories of individuals who would be found to be 

security risks. The list is not all-inclusive. In addition to the above, if there is 

probable cause to believe that a holder of a MMC has committed an act, or is going 

to commit an act, affecting the safety or security of a vessel or a public or commercial 

structure located within or adjacent to the marine environment, an IO may initiate 

S&R proceedings against the mariner’s MMC for being a security risk. 

• Within 10 years of initiation of S&R proceedings, the mariner was convicted 

of violating a dangerous drug law of the United States or of a State. 

As defined in 46 CFR 5.57(a), an individual who is employed in the service of a vessel 

is considered to be acting under the authority of his/her MMC when the holding of 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 4: SUSPENSION AND REVOCATION 

C4-6 

A.4.b. Use of a Dangerous Drug/Violation of Dangerous 

Drug Law 

A.5.

JURISDICTION AND 

PILOTS

the MMC is either required by law or regulation, or is required by an employer as a 

condition of employment. (See A.5. below for special circumstances for pilots). 

Mariners continue to act under the authority of their MMCs during periods of time 

away from the ship while they are serving in the service of the vessel. Mariners are 

also considered to be acting under the authority of their MMCs when they are 

engaged in official matters related to their credentials, including, but not limiting to, 

such acts as applying for renewal of their MMC, taking examinations for upgrading or 

endorsements, requesting duplicate or replacement credentials, appearing at a S&R 

hearing, participating in the drug testing requirements of 46 CFR 16, etc. The Coast 

Guard maintains jurisdiction over a mariner with an expired MMC because S&R 

proceedings are taken against the mariner's entitlement to the MMC. CDOA 2656 

(JORDAN) also clearly states that a mariner may be found to have been acting under 

the authority of an expired MMC and that any subsequently assessed sanctions may 

be properly imposed on any subsequently issued MMCs (renewals, ect.). It is worth 

noting, however, that the act of applying for an original MMC is not an action 

performed under the authority of any subsequently issued MMC, since the 

application precedes the issuance of the credential. See CDOAs 2025 

(ARMSTRONG) and 2062 (O’CALLIGHAN). 

The Coast Guard has jurisdiction to initiate S&R proceedings against the holder of a 

MMC who has ever been the user of, or addicted to, a dangerous drug or has within 

10 years from the initiation of S&R proceedings been convicted of violating a 

dangerous drug law of the United States or of a State. There is no requirement to 

show that the mariner was a holder of a MMC at the time of the drug use/addiction 

or at the time of the conviction, it is only necessary to establish that the mariner is a 

holder of a MMC when the complaint is issued. 

The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit decided that a state pilot, 

not required to hold a license under federal law, is not acting under the authority of 

the pilot's federal license, although it is required by the state before it will issue the 

state license (See Soriano v. U.S., 494 F. 2d 681 (9th Cir. 1974)). The U.S. District 

Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana decided that the former 46 USC 214 does 

not, by itself, authorize proceedings against federal licenses held by pilots acting 

under the authority of state licenses at the time of the relevant incident (See Dietze v. 

Siler, 414 F. Supp. 1105, (E. D. La., 1976)). The Commandant's policy is to follow 

the Soriano and Dietze decisions in all cases involving pilots acting under the authority 

of state commissions. This policy does not affect investigative procedures 

concerning casualties and civil violations involving state pilots. Pilots acting under 

the authority of federal licenses are subject to investigation and may be issued a 

complaint under 46 USC Chapter 77 or be subject to civil penalty action, as 

appropriate. Pilots acting solely under the authority of a state license are subject to 

civil penalty action for violations of applicable laws or regulations. The Maritime 

Transportation Security Act (MTSA) OF 2002; Public Law 107-295 increased the 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 4: SUSPENSION AND REVOCATION 

C4-7 

A.6.

DISCIPLINARY 

CONCERNS

A.7. EQUAL 

ACCESS TO JUSTICE 

ACT

A.8. MISLE

WANTED LIST

The MISLE Wanted List has been established to assist in locating merchant mariners 

wanted for the following S&R purposes: 

• Pending enforcement action; or 

• Acquiring invalid or revoked MMC; or

• Delivery of the ALJ’s D&O. 

Units are responsible for entering and removing names from the Wanted List in 

MISLE. IOs should routinely check the Wanted Lists during any personnel 

investigation. IOs shall contact the unit that placed the mariner on the list for details 

of action required. The following actions will normally be required: 

maximum civil penalty contained in 46 USC 2302(a) for negligent operations of a 

non-recreational vessel to $25,000. IOs should strongly consider whether maximum 

civil penalties in cases where a Pilot’s negligence contributed to a marine casualty are 

appropriate. Any evidence of criminal violation of federal statutes may be referred to 

the local U.S. attorney by the District Commander. If a violation is within the 

jurisdiction of a state or locality, the evidence should be referred to the cognizant 

state or district attorney. All criminal referrals shall be made via the cognizant Area, 

MLC or District legal office. 

It is not the intent of the Coast Guard to use S&R proceedings to maintain discipline 

on merchant vessels. Only if a disciplinary problem constitutes a hazard to life, 

property, or the environment or the problem constitutes a security risk to the marine 

transportation system, should S&R proceedings be contemplated. 

Procedures for handling applications for awards under the Equal Access to Justice 

Act are contained in 49 CFR Part 6. The Act provides for retroactive payment of 

attorney fees and certain defense costs to certain persons issued a complaint under 46 

USC Chapter 77. To be eligible, the complaint must have been dismissed, and the 

respondent must allege that the complaint was not substantially justified and must 

certify that he or she meets qualifying requirements of the act. The ALJ hearing the 

S&R case will also rule on the fee claim; the IO for the case may be required to act as 

the "operating administration counsel" as defined in the Act and in 49 CFR 6. If that 

IO is no longer available, the OCMI for the unit that issued the complaint may 

designate another IO to act in this capacity. The burden of proving that the 

complaint was “substantially justified” rests upon the Coast Guard. "Substantially 

justified" means reasonable or "having a basis in law and fact." In light of possible 

additional costs imposed by successful claims under the Equal Access to Justice Act, 

it is essential that IOs exercise careful judgment in issuing complaints. However, the 

mere fact that the respondent prevails at the hearing does not mean that the 

complaint was not substantially justified. In all cases, IOs shall file a brief opposing 

the claim for fee. Failure to do so may result in a fee award because the claim is 

unopposed, even if the Coast Guard's action was "substantially justified." Questions 

should be discussed with the servicing District legal office. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 4: SUSPENSION AND REVOCATION 

C4-8 

• Service of any document; maintain contact with mariner and request unit to 

forward the document for service. 

• Service and surrender of MMC; request the D&O, maintain contact with the 

mariner and encourage him/her to comply with D&O. 

• Pending receipt of the D&O, a written notice of suspension or revocation 

should be provided to the mariner using a format similar to Figure C4-1 

located at the end of this chapter. Verify that the mariner’s record is locked 

to ensure that duplicate, renewal, or upgraded MMCs are not issued pending 

receipt and service of the D&O. You can confirm that the mariner’s MMLD 

record is locked by viewing his/her record in MMLD through MISLE, if the 

record is locked it will be noted on the main MMLD screen. 

• Surrender of MMC; verify that the service of the D&O was made. Seek 

surrender advising mariner that any use or service under a revoked or 

suspended MMCs may be considered to be a criminal offense (See 18 USC 

2197). 

A.8.a. MISLE Enforcement Activity Status and Prompt 

Date 

A.8.b. Removing Mariners from the MISLE Wanted List 

If the mariner persists in refusing to surrender, consult the servicing Area, MLC or 

District legal office to pursue referring the case to the U.S. attorney. If the mariner 

claims that his or her MMCs are lost, require the mariner to complete a lost MMC 

affidavit, Figure C4–2 located at the end of this chapter. 

Once the mariner is placed on the Wanted List for one of the three reasons stated 

above, the Enforcement Activity shall be placed in an “Open – Suspended” status. 

IOs shall also enter a prompt date that equals the expiration date of the MMC plus 

one year to account for the grace period provided in 46 CFR Subchapter B. For 

example; if the mariner’s MMC expires on 15 Jan 2007, the date that should be 

entered as the prompt date shall be 15 Jan 2008. The activity shall remain open until 

the prompt date passes and then an entry shall be made on the activity summary tab 

that the activity is being closed since the MMC is no longer valid, but if the mariner is 

subsequently located, the activity owner shall be contacted. The status should then 

be changed to “Closed - Administrative Action.” When the mariner is wanted for 

pending enforcement action, the unit shall maintain control and ownership of the 

activity and retain the case file locally. Mariner’s can be removed from the Wanted 

List in accordance with the below section. 

Once a mariner is located and the appropriate action is taken, the unit with

ownership of the activity shall remove the mariner from the Wanted List. Mariners 

may also be removed from the wanted list if the statue of limitations for the offense 

has elapsed or the MMC grace period date has passed and the MMC is no longer 

valid. When a mariner is removed because of the statute of limitations expiration or 

the MMC is no longer valid, an entry shall be made on the activity summary tab 

requiring notification if the mariner is subsequently located so that appropriate action 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 4: SUSPENSION AND REVOCATION 

C4-9 

A.8.c. MISLE Entries after Removal from Wanted List 

A.8.d. Release of MISLE Wanted List 

A.9. COMMANDANT

(CG-5451)

ASSISTANCE. 

(if any) may be taken. A mariner subsequently located who was wanted to acquire a 

revoked or no longer valid MMC shall be advised that they must comply with the 

Administrative Clemency process to be eligible to apply for a new MMC. 

When a mariner is removed from the Wanted List because the statute of limitations 

has expired, an entry similar to the following shall be made on the enforcement 

activity summary tab: “MM/DD/YY: Statute of limitations for service of 

Misconduct Complaint expired, SNM removed from wanted list. SNM shall be 

required to address his alcohol use before processing any future MMC application. 

MMLD record to remain locked.” When a mariner who was wanted for pending 

enforcement action is removed from the Wanted List because the MMC grace period 

has expired, an entry similar to the following shall be made on the enforcement 

activity summary tab: “MM/DD/YY: SNM removed from wanted list, MMD 

expired MM/DD/YY and is past 1 year grace period. SNM shall be required to 

address his drug test refusal before processing any future MMC application. MMLD 

record to remain locked.” When a mariner who was wanted to acquire a revoked or 

invalid MMC is removed from the Wanted List because the MMC grace period has 

expired, an entry similar to the following shall be made on the enforcement activity 

summary tab: “MM/DD/YY: SNM removed from wanted list, revoked License 

expired MM/DD/YY and MMD expired MM/DD/YY and is past 1 year grace 

period. SNM shall be required to apply for administrative clemency before

processing any future MMC application. MMLD record to remain locked.”

The MISLE Wanted List is currently not releasable to the public. Once the list is 

made releasable, policy will be established to require that Personal information 

(SSNs, address, etc.) be redacted prior to the list being released to the public. The list 

may be released to Federal, State, or local agencies with responsibility for 

investigating and/or enforcing violations of U.S. law. 

Close liaison between field offices and Commandant (CG-5451) is desirable. 

Officers assigned to Headquarters have the advantage of being exposed to a wide 

variety of cases and situations. In addition, they will be aware of the latest policy 

concerning various matters. IOs are encouraged to telephone Commandant (CG5451) when necessary to discuss problems of mutual concern. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 4: SUSPENSION AND REVOCATION 

C4-10 

B.1.

INTRODUCTION

The complaint and answer are the primary elements of the S&R process. Some of 

the regulations concerning complaints and answers are: 

• Filing of Documents, 33 CFR 20.302; 

• Form and Content of Filed Documents, 33 CFR 20.303 

• Service of Documents, 33 CFR 20.304 

• Complaint, 33 CFR 20.307 

• Answer, 33 CFR 20.308 

B.2. COMPLAINT

B.2.a. Caption 

The Caption identifies the case and type of filing and is made up of the following 

elements: 

Title: United States Coast Guard, Complainant 

vs. 

[Respondent's Name], Respondent 

Note: License & MMD Number is referenced in body of complaint, not in the case 

title. 

Docket Number: Assigned by Docketing Center - leave blank in the complaint and 

answer. 

Coast Guard Enforcement Activity Number: MISLE Enforcement Activity number 

assigned by MISLE. 

B.2.b. Introductory Paragraph 

B.2.c. Statutory and Regulatory Authority 

The following table gives examples of the proper statute and regulation to cite on the 

complaint: 

B. COMPLAINTS AND ANSWERS

• Service of Complaints, 46 CFR 5.107 & 33 CFR 20.304 

The complaint initiates the S&R proceedings, and is made up of the following 

elements: the caption, the introductory paragraph, the statutes violated, the 

allegations, a proposed Order, proposed dates and location for the hearing, name and 

address of the IO, the IO’s unit, the rights of respondent and the options of 

respondent. 

Type of Filing: Complaint. 

The introductory paragraph advises the respondent that the Coast Guard has initiated 

an S&R proceeding. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 4: SUSPENSION AND REVOCATION 

C4-11 

If the Coast Guard 

alleges... 

Cite the following 

Statute: 

Negligence 46 USC 7703(1)(B) 

Misconduct 46 USC 7703(1)(B) 

Violation of Law or 

Reg 

46 USC 7703(1)(A) 

Incompetence 46 USC 7703(4) 

Drug Use 46 USC 7704(c) 

Drug conviction 46 USC 7704(b) 

NDRA conviction 46 USC 7703(3) 

Conviction preventing 

issuance of MMC 

46 USC 7703(2) 

A security Risk 46 USC 7703(5) 

B.2.d. Allegations 

B.3.

JURISDICTIONAL 

ALLEGATIONS

If the Coast Guard alleges... 

Drug use or drug law conviction 

NDRA conviction 

Conviction preventing issuance of 

MMC 

Incompetence 

Security Risk

Negligence 

Misconduct 

Violation of law or regulation 

Respondent acted under the authority of that 

license, certificate, or document on [date] by 

serving as [type of service] aboard the [vessel] 

as required by [law or regulation or condition 

of employment]. 

And the following Regulation: 

46 CFR 5.29 

46 CFR 5.27 

46 CFR 5.33 

46 CFR 5.31 

46 CFR 5.35 

46 CFR 5.35 

TBD (no regulation currently 

exists) 

TBD (no regulation currently 

exists) 

TBD (no regulation currently 

exists) 

Allegations are written in numbered paragraphs. There are two types of allegations; 

Jurisdictional and Factual, which constitute the facts of the alleged offense. 

The following table gives examples of the proper wording of the Jurisdictional 

allegations for the complaint: 

Then use the following jurisdictional 

allegation: 

Respondent is the holder of the following 

Coast Guard issued credentials: 

Respondent acted under the authority of that 

license, certificate, or document on [date] by 

engaging in official matters regarding that 

license, certificate or document by [applying for 

renewal, taking an exam for upgrade or 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 4: SUSPENSION AND REVOCATION 

C4-12 

B.4. FACTUAL 

ALLEGATIONS

Factual allegations should be written in simple paragraphs in plain English and in 

general should include the following alleged facts: 

• Where/when the alleged actions occurred; 

• What occurred; and 

• What damage occurred. 

If the Coast Guard alleges... 

Drug Use 3⁄4 Date and type of drug test 

3⁄4 Collector’s name and company name

3⁄4 The respondent signed a CCF 

3⁄4 Name of drug test lab that analyzed test 

Conviction Cases 

3⁄4 Drug 

3⁄4 DWI 

3⁄4 Other 

3⁄4 Type of Conviction 

3⁄4 Court 

Negligence 3⁄4 Date/Time/Location of casualty 

Negligence - Allision 3⁄4 Date/Time/Location of casualty 

Negligence - Grounding 3⁄4 Date/Time/Location of casualty 

3⁄4 Weather/Sea Conditions 

Violation of Marine Safety Law 

or Regulation 

3⁄4 Date/Time/Location 

3⁄4 Cite Regulation or Statute by title and section 

number 

Misconduct 3⁄4 Date/Time/Location 

Incompetence Type: 

3⁄4 Professional 

endorsements, requesting a duplicate or

replacement, or appearing at an administrative 

hearing, etc.]. 

The following table gives general guidance to assist in writing the factual allegations 

for a complaint for various offenses. Sample factual allegations for various offenses 

are contained in the next section. 

Then the facts should allege: 

3⁄4 Test results & MRO name 

3⁄4 Date/Location 

3⁄4 Weather/Sea Conditions 

3⁄4 Weather/Sea Conditions

3⁄4 Number of Chart demonstrating the location 

is charted

3⁄4 Facts of violation 

3⁄4 Cite statutes, regulations, common law, 

general maritime law, ship's regulation or 

order, or shipping articles and/or similar 

sources violated 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 4: SUSPENSION AND REVOCATION 

C4-13 

3⁄4 Medical/Mental 

Security Risk 3⁄4 Date/Time/Location 

B.5. SAMPLE 

FACTUAL 

ALLEGATIONS

B.5.a. Misconduct 

B.5.a.1. Failure To Perform Duty 

The offense of failing to perform duty is distinct from incompetence in that the 

former is a failure to perform, whereas the latter is inability to perform. A person 

may neglect a duty by never entering upon it; such is an omission of action, rather 

than an act. A duty may be imposed by law, regulation, or custom in effect at the 

time of the offense. When there is an intervening cause (confinement on the ship or 

other relief from duty) for failure to perform, the allegation for the offense(s) should 

be based on the actions from which the relief from duty was based. [NOTE: See 

CDOA 1533 (DONLAN)] Sample factual allegations: 

The Coast Guard alleges that: 

1. On or about July 1, 1995, while the [vessel name] was at sea, respondent 

wrongfully failed (or refused) to perform watertender duties on the 1200-1600 watch. 

1. On or about 0800, August 1, 1995, while the [vessel name] was at London, 

England, respondent wrongfully failed (or refused) to report to work as a deck 

department day worker. 

1. On or about April 1, 1995, respondent was sleeping in the forecastle head and 

wrongfully failed to perform lookout duty on the 1200-1600 watch. 

3⁄4 Facts constituting Incompetence 

3⁄4 Facts documenting the security risk to the 

safety or security of a vessel, facility, etc. 

In the following examples, sample factual allegations are provided for complaints 

issued for some typical offenses of misconduct, violation of law or regulation, 

negligence, incompetence, and dangerous drug offenses. These examples are not 

inclusive of every situation that may be encountered; they are intended to illustrate 

the most common types of situations. 

Generally, a factual allegation for a complaint issued for misconduct must, on its face, 

allege facts, which fulfill the standards of 46 CFR 5.27. The words of the factual 

allegation must allege that what was done was wrongful. Thus, if the actions alleged 

could, on the face of the factual allegation alone, be other than wrongful, the word 

"wrongfully" should be included. The following examples provide factual allegations 

alleging offenses which amount to misconduct. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 4: SUSPENSION AND REVOCATION 

C4-14 

B.5.a.2. Failure To Perform Duty By Reason Of 

Intoxication 

To sustain a factual allegation of failure to perform duty by reason of intoxication, it 

must be affirmatively proven that the intoxicated state of the respondent was directly 

or indirectly coupled with the person's failure to perform. Sample factual allegation: 

The Coast Guard alleges that: 

B.5.a.3. Disobedience Of A Lawful Command 

The authority of the ship's master to issue orders is well established (see 

46 USC 11501). A command need not be issued directly by the master, but may be 

transmitted by the master through subordinate officers. No statute permits a 

mariner, either expressly or implicitly, to disobey a lawful order of a superior; a mate 

or engineer as well as the master (certain statutory safeguards provide a remedy to 

mariners in cases of abuse). The relationship of master to mariner is entirely 

different from that of the employer and employee ashore. A mariner who questions 

a master's order does so at risk. Whenever the basis of a complaint is refusal or 

failure to obey an order, the evidence should show that the order was not in the 

nature of a request, that it was properly communicated to the person issued the 

complaint, that it was lawful, and that it was directly connected with the safe 

operations of the vessel. The factual allegations must tell what the command was 

and, unless obvious, the manner in which it was disobeyed. Sample factual 

allegations: 

The Coast Guard alleges that: 

1. On or about 1300, July 1, 1995, while the [vessel name] was at sea, respondent was 

given a lawful command by [name of officer] to take his/her regularly assigned 

lifeboat station. 

2. Respondent wrongfully disobeyed the order by failing to arrive at the station. 

1. On or about 1300, August 1, 1995, while the [vessel name] was at the Houston, 

Texas, City Dock, was given a lawful command by [name of CE] to change and clean 

fuel oil strainers on your watch. 

1. On or about April 1, 1995, while the [vessel name] was at the port of Oslo, 

Norway, respondent wrongfully failed (or refused) to stand the 0400-0800 gangway 

watch because respondent was intoxicated (or was under the influence of alcohol). 

2. Respondent wrongfully disobeyed the order by failing to change the strainers. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 4: SUSPENSION AND REVOCATION 

C4-15 

B.5.a.4. Assault/Assault And Battery 

In the following examples, several types of assault or assault and battery have been 

set forth. Assault has been defined as an attempt to touch another without 

permission, or as a placing of another in fear of bodily harm. Battery is, then, a 

consummation of the first type of assault. Assault with dangerous weapon is a 

serious breach of safety; assaults by mariners on the master or other officers, whether 

or not resulting in injury, are grave offenses. Sample factual allegations: 

The Coast Guard alleges that: 

1. On or about April 1, 1995, while the [vessel name] was at sea, respondent 

wrongfully assault the master, [name].

2. Responded brandished a 12-inch wrench in a threatening manner and offering to 

strike the master. 

1. On or about 1 June 1995, while the [vessel name] was at sea, respondent 

wrongfully assaulted and battered a member of the crew, Frank Jones, by beating him 

with his fists. 

1. On or about July 1, 1995, while the [vessel name] was at sea, respondent 

wrongfully assaulted a member of the crew,[name], by threatening him with a 9mm 

pistol. 

B.5.a.5. Desertion 

This is the abandonment of a ship in which a mariner has engaged to perform a 

voyage, before the expiration of the mariner's contract and without leave. In 

maritime law, desertion means not merely an unauthorized absence from the ship 

without leave, but unauthorized absence with no intention of returning to its service. 

Intent, being a state of mind, is not open to direct proof but must be inferred from 

other facts. Thus, to sustain an offense of desertion, proof of the permanent absence 

from the vessel is essential to distinguish desertion from failure to join. Removal of 

all personal effects may indicate the intent to permanently abandon. However, the 

leaving of any of a mariner's effects aboard the mariner's vessel does not necessarily 

rebut an indicated intent not to return. An individual may desert whether or not the 

mariner takes his or her personal effects, and removing personal effects does not 

always establish desertion. There are many other ways of proving intent (e. g., 

statements, how long the individual was gone, and where the mariner went). In the 

case of desertion, 46 USC11501 provides for the "forfeiture of all or any part of the 

clothes or effects [which the deserter] leaves on board." (Obviously, if Congress had 

intended that desertion would not have occurred if clothes or effects were left on 

board, there would not be a provision for the forfeiture of such effects.) Sample 

factual allegation: 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 4: SUSPENSION AND REVOCATION 

C4-16 

The Coast Guard alleges that: 

B.5.a.6. Theft And Robbery 

Theft (larceny) is the taking and carrying away of another's property with intent to 

permanently deprive. Robbery is the taking of property by force or putting in fear, 

from the person or presence of another. Wrongful possession of another's property 

is also misconduct. Sample factual allegations: 

The Coast Guard alleges that: 

1. On or about June 1, 1995, while the [vessel name] was at Liverpool, England, 

respondent wrongfully had in his possession certain stores of the [vessel name]. 

1. On or about April 1, 1995, while the [vessel name] was at sea, respondent 

wrongfully took possession of personal property (a radio, watch, and two rings) of 

another member of the crew, [name]. 

B.5.a.7. Failure To Account 

The Coast Guard considers that a person serving on a ship who receives money from 

others and fails to make a proper accounting for it at the prescribed time continues to 

act under the authority of his or her MMCs, to the extent that the person may be 

issued a complaint for this offense after completion of the voyage. Sample factual 

allegation: 

The Coast Guard alleges that: 

1. On or after a voyage which extended between April 1, 1995, and July 1, 1995, 

respondent was a purser aboard the [vessel name].

2. Respondent collected [dollar amount] from a passenger, [name]. 

B.5.a.8. Possession Of Alcoholic Beverages 

Law or regulation does not expressly prohibit the possession of alcoholic beverages 

aboard commercial vessels, except in certain instances as specified in 33 CFR 95.045. 

However, a vessel owner or master may prohibit such possession or use, either 

verbally, by written order, or through an employment contract with crewmembers 

(Shipping Articles, Form CG-705A, specifically warns crewmembers against having 

or bringing aboard "grog," i.e., any intoxicating beverage). Sample factual allegations: 

1. On or about April 1, 1995, respondent wrongfully deserted the [vessel name], at 

London, England. 

1. On or about March 1, 1995, while the [vessel name] was at sea, respondent 

robbed another member of the crew, [identity of victim], of his wallet. 

3. Respondent wrongfully failed to return the money to [name] at the conclusion of 

the voyage. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 4: SUSPENSION AND REVOCATION 

C4-17 

The Coast Guard alleges that: 

1. On April 1, 1995, while the [vsl name] was at New York, NY, respondent 

wrongfully brought liquor aboard (or caused liquor to be brought aboard) the [vessel 

name]. 

B.5.a.9. Possession, Use, Sale, or Association With 

Dangerous Drugs 

IOs shall not issue a complaint for misconduct if the evidence of drug use is a result 

of a positive chemical tests administered under 46 CFR part 16 or 33 CFR part 95, in 

those cases IOs shall issue a complaint for drug use under 46 USC 7704(c). A 

complaint for misconduct for use of a dangerous drug should be issued when the 

evidence of use is not a positive drug test, i.e. credible witness(es) observed the 

mariner using a dangerous drug. The Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention and 

Control Act of 1970 prohibits most activities involving narcotics (including opiates 

and cocaine) and marijuana. 21 USC 841 prohibits unauthorized manufacture, 

distribution, dispensing, or possession with intent to do any of the above, of 

controlled substances (including narcotics and marijuana). 21 USC 952 prohibits 

importation of controlled substances without a permit, or except in accordance with 

regulations, as the Attorney General shall prescribe. 21 USC 955 prohibits 

possession of narcotics and marijuana when arriving or departing the United States 

unless listed on the manifest. 21 USC 957 prohibits import of controlled substances 

by anyone not registered to do so. 21 USC 802 defines "controlled substance," 

"marijuana," and "narcotic drug." 21 USC 812 lists controlled substances, dividing 

them into five schedules. The complete schedules are listed in 21 CFR 1308. 

Marijuana, THC, and heroin are in Schedule I; cocaine is in Schedule II. In view of 

these comprehensive provisions, particularly 21 USC 844, possession of narcotics or 

marijuana is presumed to be wrongful in the absence of evidence to the contrary. 

Possession, use, and any kind of dealing with narcotics or marijuana by U.S. 

merchant mariners is considered among the most serious offenses within the 

jurisdiction of the Coast Guard, and those for which S&R actions are usually 

required. If a mariner commits an act of misconduct regarding possession, use, or 

association involving marijuana, 46 CFR 5.59(a) allows the ALJ to grant a sanction 

less than revocation upon showing by the mariner that the possession, use, or 

association was the result of experimentation and that the mariner has submitted 

proof at the hearing of rehabilitation. See Section B.9 for guidance on appropriate 

sanctions and Section E for use of settlement agreements. Sample factual allegations: 

The Coast Guard alleges that: 

1. On or about April 1, 1995, while the [vessel name] was at Galveston, TX, 

respondent wrongfully had cocaine in his/her possession. 

1. On or about June 1, 1995, while the [vessel name] was at sea, respondent 

wrongfully had intoxicating beverages in his/her possession. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 4: SUSPENSION AND REVOCATION 

C4-18 

B.5.a.10. Failure To Respond To Summons Or Subpoena 

The authority of the Coast Guard to compel the attendance of witnesses or the 

production of other evidence at an investigation or hearing is provided by 46 USC 

7705. If a mariner serving under authority of his or her MMCs is subpoenaed to 

appear as a witness or produce evidence, and fails to appear, S&R proceedings may 

be initiated. Sample factual allegation: 

The Coast Guard alleges that: 

1. On March 31, 1995, respondent was issued a subpoena to appear as a witness in a 

hearing scheduled for October 1, 1995. 

2. The subpoena was duly issued and served by Ensign Frank Benson, Investigating 

Officer. 

B.5.a.11. Harassment Of Passengers 

Passengers on vessels are entitled to protection from invasion of their privacy and 

from personal rudeness. However, IOs may encounter great difficulty in obtaining 

evidence to support these allegations. In cases involving minors, parents are 

reluctant to permit them to appear as witnesses or to be interrogated. Also, when 

these situations arise on the outbound voyage, passengers debarking in foreign ports 

can submit their testimony only by deposition. Several cases on appeal involve 

varying degrees of harassment, from respondent wrongfully entering passengers' 

staterooms and addressing them with improper language to committing overt acts of 

physical contact. Where the act of physical contact is sexual in nature, IOs shall refer 

to B.5.b.3 as sexual abuse or contact is a violation of law. Sample factual allegation: 

The Coast Guard alleges that: 

B.5.a.12. Sexual Harassment 

Congress has enacted several laws to protect workers from intimidating, hostile, and 

offensive work places, and the marine work place is not exempt from these laws. 

Marine employers shall follow the rules established by the Equal Employment

Opportunity Commission (EEOC) to protect workers from such an environment. 

Complaints made by mariners should be investigated promptly and tactfully. IOs 

should advise victims unless a witness or other proof can be found to verify that 

1. On or about August 1, 1995, while the [vessel name] was at New Orleans, LA, 

respondent wrongfully sold and/or deliver to a crewmember, [name of person], a 

quantity of opium. 

3. On October 1, 1995, respondent wrongfully fail to appear at the hearing. 

1. On or about May 1, 1995, while the [vessel name] was at Hamilton, Bermuda, 

respondent wrongfully enter the stateroom of a female passenger, [name of victim], 

and addressed her in improper language. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 4: SUSPENSION AND REVOCATION 

C4-19 

words or gestures occurred, a case might be hard to prove. If an investigation finds 

that sexual harassment has occurred aboard a documented vessel, S&R proceedings 

should be strongly considered against the person who committed the act. The basis 

for the complaint of misconduct is 42 USC 2000e, and 29 CFR 1604.11, which 

prohibit sexual harassment in the workplace. Sample factual allegations: 

The Coast Guard alleges that: 

1. On or about Aug 4, 1995, while the [vessel name] was off loading cargo, 

respondent wrongfully made sexual gestures towards Seaman [name of victim], 

making for an offensive work environment, and causing her to leave her station as a 

line handler. 

B.5.a.13. Failure of Master to Stop Sexual Harassment 

Congress has enacted several laws to protect workers from intimidating, hostile, and 

offensive work places, and the marine work place is not exempt from these laws. If 

the investigation finds the master of the vessel failed to stop the behavior of the 

offending person, S&R proceedings shall be initiated. Sample factual allegation: 

The Coast Guard alleges that: 

B.5.a.14. Improper Treatment Of Crew 

Maltreatment of crewmembers by the master and officers, and the abandonment of 

mariners in a foreign port, are offenses punishable by fine or imprisonment. To 

constitute an offense under criminal statutes, maltreatment must be cruel and unusual 

punishment, induced by malice or hatred; the abandonment of a mariner in a foreign 

port must be done maliciously and without justifiable cause. The "borderline" in 

determining maltreatment is a fine distinction between extreme and unjustifiable acts 

and the authority under 46 USC 11501 of the master to punish mariners for 

disobedience or continued disobedience of lawful orders. For example, the holding 

in irons of a mariner for continued refusal to bring coffee to the chief mate was held 

to be cruel and unusual punishment predicated on an unlawful order. In other cases, 

where mariners were placed in irons for disobedience of a lawful order and 

punishment was temperately applied, no offense was committed. Sample factual 

allegation: 

1. On or about March 15, 1995, while the [vessel name] was underway, respondent 

wrongfully used his position as watch supervisor, by telling AB [name of victim] that 

if he wanted to have preferred duties, he should leave his stateroom door unlocked 

for the respondent’s "payback" visits. 

1. On or about Aug 4, 1995, as Master of the [vessel name], while the [vessel name] 

was moored at Pier 24, Port of Chicago, you failed to act upon the complaint of 

sexual harassment made by Seaman Bronson against 3rd mate Kelly. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 4: SUSPENSION AND REVOCATION 

C4-20 

The Coast Guard alleges that: 

B.5.a.15. Smuggling Or Failure To Declare Dutiable 

Merchandise In Domestic Or Foreign Ports 

The Coast Guard acts in conjunction with the U.S. Customs Service in the protection 

of revenue and prevention of smuggling activities; this is a deeply rooted mission, 

from the birth of the Revenue Cutter Service. As in the prohibition against the 

importation of dangerous drugs, smuggling statutes provide that possession shall be 

deemed evidence sufficient for a finding of guilty unless mitigating factors can be 

shown. These provisions include smuggling into the U.S. and other countries, and 

situations short of actual importation, where there has been an attempt or intent to 

evade payment of lawful duties. A complaint issued under 46 USC Chapter 77 

involving the illegal importation of merchandise, brought other than on complaint of 

a Customs Officer, should be processed in cooperation with the Customs Service at 

the port where the offense occurred. Sample factual allegation: 

The Coast Guard alleges that: 

B.5.a.16. Stowaways/Aiding Illegal Entry Of Aliens 

Stowing away, or the aiding, assisting, or abetting of any person who stows away, on 

a U.S. vessel with the intent to obtain transportation is prohibited by 18 USC 2199. 

The bringing into the U.S., harboring, or concealing, or attempting to do so, on 

board any vessel, of any alien not duly admitted by an immigration officer or not 

lawfully entitled to enter or reside in the U.S. is prohibited by 8 USC 1324. A case 

may occur in which a person has been discovered to be on board a vessel illegally, 

and the person's residence status is undetermined at the time of the investigation. In 

another instance, a conviction for harboring or concealing an alien may have been 

obtained under 8 USC 1324, or criminal prosecution for one or more reasons has 

been undertaken by the U.S. attorney. In cases involving alien smuggling rings, 

evidence at the S&R proceedings must be supplied through the testimony of the 

immigration officer, or the master or other ship's officer, having direct knowledge of 

the offense, rather than relying on the disposition of the case by the federal district 

court. A situation may arise where a mariner aids a stowaway (other than an illegal 

alien) by furnishing food and a place of concealment, although there is no evidence 

1. On June 1, 1995, while the [vessel name] was at sea, respondent wrongfully 

imprisoned a member of the crew, [name of crewmember], by confining him in irons 

in the Number 2 lifeboat. 

1. On or about July 1, 1995, while the [vessel name] was in San Diego, CA, 

respondent wrongfully brought [attempted to bring] into the United States certain 

merchandise [articles, commodities] which could not lawfully enter the United States 

until [(payment of tax or duty), (declaration, invoice, or description of said 

merchandise on a manifest of ship's cargo) required by the U.S. Customs Service had 

been met. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 4: SUSPENSION AND REVOCATION 

C4-21 

to show that the mariner aided the stowaway to board the vessel. While this is not 

specifically covered in 8 USC 1324, it is considered misconduct equivalent to aiding 

the stowaway to board the vessel. Sample factual allegations: 

The Coast Guard alleges that: 

1. On or about April 1, 1995, while the [vessel name] was at San Francisco, CA, 

respondent brought [attempted to bring] into the United States, or concealed or 

harbored [attempted to conceal or harbor], an alien not duly admitted by an 

immigration officer or not lawfully entitled to enter the United States. 

1. On or about June 1, 1995, while the [vessel name] was in Hong Kong, without the 

consent of the master or owner, with intent to obtain transportation there for, 

respondent aided [abetted, assisted] to stow away aboard [vessel name] a person, 

[name of person]. 

B.5.a.17. Failure to Join 

In the majority of instances, proof can be established by introduction of the Shipping 

Articles showing the mariner's signature to sign on the vessel, and the corresponding 

entry by the master stating the mariner's absence at the end of the voyage or at the 

time the crew "pays off.” Certified copies of relevant Official Logbook entries made 

in accordance with 46 USC 11502 should supplement this evidence. Sample factual 

allegation: 

The Coast Guard alleges that: 

B.5.a.18. Fraudulent Applications 

An original license or certificate of registry that is issued upon submission of false or 

materially incomplete information is void under the Coast Guard’s mariner licensing 

regulations. See 46 CFR 10.205(f)(4); CDOA 2025 (ARMSTRONG). If, during the 

course of an investigation, an IO determines that a mariner was issued an original 

license or certificate of registry after submitting an application that contained false or 

materially incomplete information, IOs should inform the cognizant OCMI of that 

fact. In such cases, the OCMI must notify the mariner, in writing, that the license or 

certificate of registry is null and void and inform the mariner that, upon return of the 

relevant license or certificate of registry, the appeal procedures in 46 CFR 10.204 

apply. 

1. On or about September 1, 1995, while the [vessel name] was at Djakarta, Malaysia, 

respondent wrongfully aided and assisted a stowaway, [name of stowaway], illegally 

on board, by furnishing him with food and shelter. 

1. On or about August 1, 1995, respondent wrongfully failed to join the [vessel 

name] at Wilmington, DE. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 4: SUSPENSION AND REVOCATION 

C4-22 

While the authority to void an original license or certificate is in 46 CFR Part 10, no 

such provision exists in 46 CFR Part 12 to void an original MMD. However, the 

rationale shall apply to MMDs as the processes for obtaining the credentials are 

similar. An individual can not possess a valid credential that was obtained by fraud. 

In order to hold a property interest an individual must have a “legitimate claim of 

entitlement to it.” (see Bd of Regents of State Colleges v. Roth, 408 U.S. at 2709) 

Therefore an individual is not entitled to a MMD he obtained by providing false or 

materially incomplete information. If, during the course of an investigation, an IO 

determines that a mariner was issued an original MMD after submitting an 

application that contained false or materially incomplete information, IOs should 

inform the cognizant OCMI of that fact. In such cases, the OCMI must notify the 

mariner, in writing, that the MMD is null and void and inform the mariner that, upon 

return of the relevant MMD, the appeal procedures in 46 CFR 1.03 apply 

Under 18 USC 1001 intentionally false or fraudulent statements or representations 

made in any matter within the jurisdiction of any department or agency of the United 

States are punishable by a $10,000 fine or 5 years' imprisonment, or both. Such cases 

can be forwarded to the Area, MLC or District Commander with a recommendation 

for referral to the U.S. attorney. Current policy requires a mariner who has obtained 

a subsequently issued (non-original) MMC to be afforded an S&R hearing in such 

cases. If a fraudulent application is discovered during the application process, the 

MMC shall not be issued and the provisions of Volume III, Chapter 3, Section B, 

shall be followed. If it is determined that statements in an application were not 

fraudulently made but were merely the result of an unintended misstatement or 

misunderstanding, IOs should remove any reference to fraud from the complaint. 

See Section B.9 for appropriate S&R sanction guidance. Sample factual allegations: 

The Coast Guard alleges that: 

1. On May 20, 2001, respondent submitted a signed CG-719B “Application for 

Merchant Mariner Document (MMD), License, or Certificate of Registry” to Coast 

Guard Regional Examination Center, Toledo OH. 

2. Respondent indicated that he/she had no criminal convictions by checking NO to 

the question “Have you ever been convicted by any court – including military court – 

for an offense other than a minor traffic violation?” 

3. On April 13, 1999, respondent was convicted of assault and battery by the U.S. 

District Court in Portland, OR. 

4. (FRAUD) Respondent wrongfully submitted a fraudulent application. 

B.5.a.19. Absence Without Leave (AWOL) and Absence 

Over Leave (AOL) 

Although both of these constitute unauthorized absences, the former includes the 

4. (FALSE INFO) Respondent wrongfully failed to provide full disclosure of 

his/her conviction record. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 4: SUSPENSION AND REVOCATION 

C4-23 

element of unauthorized departure from the vessel. Consequently, if a complaint 

against a mariner for absence and evidence indicates that the mariner had authority to 

depart but did not return when due back, the factual allegation should reflect AOL. 

No specific intent need be proved; the act supplies the intent. If a mariner on 

authorized leave is unable to return through no fault of his or her own, the mariner 

has not committed an offense. For example, if it is verified that the mariner's 

absence was solely due to the mariner's arrest and detention by civil authorities, 

followed by acquittal in a civil court, the mariner should be found not guilty of the 

factual allegation; the same rule applies to an illness, which prevents the mariner's 

return. However, when such absence is caused by misconduct for which the mariner 

is convicted in a civil court or there is evidence produced during the hearing for 

AOL, it does not provide a defense to the complaint of unauthorized absence. S&R 

proceedings should be brought for these offenses only when it can be established 

that the absence of the mariner created a situation in which the safety or security of 

the vessel, passengers, crew, or marine environment was adversely affected. The fact 

that the absence created a crew shortage below the complement required by the 

Certificate of Inspection (COI) usually establishes such an adverse effect. Whether 

the ship was in a foreign or domestic port does not itself determine the effect. 

Sample factual allegations: 

The Coast Guard alleges that: 

1. On or about April 1, 1995, respondent was wrongfully absent from the [vessel 

name] without leave, within 24 hours of the [vessel name]'s sailing from London, 

England. 

1. On or about April 12, 1995, respondent wrongfully remained absent from the 

[vessel name] beyond his/her authorized leave. 

B.5.a.20. Refusal to Submit to a Required Drug Test 

46 CFR part 16 prescribes the minimum standards, procedures, and means to be used 

to test for the use of dangerous drugs. It specifies the following required drug tests: 

pre-employment, periodic, random, Serious Marine Incident, and reasonable cause. 

It also defines “refuse to submit” as refusing to take a drug test as set out in 49 CFR 

40.191. Some of the reasons why an individual is determined to have refused to take 

a drug test as set out in 49 CFR 40.191 are: 

• Failure to appear for any test (except a pre-employment) within a reasonable 

time; 

• Failure to remain at the testing site until the testing process is complete; 

• Failure to provide a urine sample for any test required by Part 16; 

1. On or about April 12, 1995, while the [vessel name] was at sea, respondent was 

wrongfully absent from his/her duties without authority. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 4: SUSPENSION AND REVOCATION 

C4-24 

• Failure to cooperate with any part of the testing process, e.g., refusal to empty 

pockets, behaving in a confrontational way that disrupts the collection 

process, etc.; or 

• An MRO has verified that the individual has an adulterated or substituted test 

result. 

IOs should familiarize themselves with the contents of 49 CFR 40.191. IOs shall 

issue a complaint for misconduct seeking revocation in any case where a MMC 

holder refuses to take a required drug test, unless the mariner provides a legitimate 

reason for refusing to take the test. If a legitimate reason is provided, IOs have the 

discretion to issue a Letter of Warning, or to issue a complaint seeking an order of 

less than revocation. See Section B.9 for guidance on appropriate sanctions. Sample 

factual allegations: 

The Coast Guard alleges that: 

1. On April 13 2003, respondent was informed by his/her marine employer that 

he/she had been selected for a random drug test. 

2. Respondent was told to report to SJ Collection Inc to provide a urine sample. 

B.5.b. Violation Of Law Or Regulation 

B.5.b.1. Failure to Take Action to Stop Sexual 

Harassment 

42 USC 2000e and the regulations published in 29 CFR, Subtitle B, Chapter XIV--

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Part 1604, Section 1604.11 deal 

3. Respondent failed to report to the collection site and never provided a urine 

sample for testing. 

The decision to issue a complaint for a violation of law or regulation, vice 

misconduct or negligence, should be based on the severity of the violation. Example, 

a master involved in a collision who failed to properly post a look out, as required by 

Nav Rule 5, can be issued a complaint for a violation of law or regulation, 

misconduct, or negligence. IOs should research applicable laws and regulations, and 

their intent with regard to promoting marine safety, and the protection of navigable 

waters. IOs must look at the facts involved in the casualty and decide whether to 

issue the complaint for a violation of law or misconduct. Recent legislation, i.e., Oil 

Pollution Act of 1990, and the Sexual Abuse Act of 1986 have been codified in laws 

applicable to marine safety. Other laws such as the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 USC 

2000e), although not codified in laws dealing with marine safety, exist and are 

applicable to promoting marine safety. IOs should also seek a comparable sanction, 

i.e., if the law requires imprisonment, revocation should be sought. The following 

offenses and sample factual allegations deal with acts that may not be codified in laws 

or regulation specifically dealing with marine safety, but are of growing concern 

within the marine industry. The law or regulation violated shall be cited in the factual 

allegations for all violation of law or regulation offenses. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 4: SUSPENSION AND REVOCATION 

C4-25 

specifically with sexual harassment. The tie to marine safety is made through the 

effects sexual harassment have on an individual. Sexual harassment creates an 

intimidating, hostile, and offensive work environment, which affects a crewmember's 

work performance. 42 USC 2000e requires that employers must ensure the work 

place is free from such behavior. If an investigation indicates a master was aware of a 

crewmember being sexually harassed, and no action was taken to stop it, a complaint 

against the master may be preferred. Sample factual allegation: 

The Coast Guard alleges that: 

1. On or about May 1, 1995, the respondent was serving as master on board the 

[vessel name]. 

2. Responded received a report of sexual harassment; by Ordinary Seaman Smith, 

that AB [offender] made suggestive comments that were considered lewd and sexual 

in nature. 

B.5.b.2. Failure To Report A Sexual Offense 

46 USC 10104 requires the master, or person in charge, to report to the Coast Guard 

all complaints of sexual offenses that occur aboard U.S. documented vessels. The 

failure to report a sexual offense differs from failure to take action regarding sexual 

harassment. Sexual offenses, as described in the Sexual Abuse Act of 1986, (18 USC 

Chapter 109A), are far more serious than sexual harassment because physical contact 

is involved. The sentencing guidelines for sexual offenses are also more severe than 

sexual harassment. If an investigation indicates that the master, or person in charge, 

of a documented vessel fails to notify the Coast Guard of a complaint dealing with a 

sexual offense, S&R proceedings shall be initiated, and revocation sought. Sample 

factual allegation: 

The Coast Guard alleges that: 

1. On or about May 1, 1995, responded was serving as master on board the [vessel 

name], a U.S. documented vessel. 

2. Respondent received a report by Ordinary Seaman [name], that Bos'n [offender] 

forced her to have sex by threatening her with bodily injury if she did not consent. 

B.5.b.3. Sexual Abuse 

The guidance for specific violations covered under the Sexual Abuse Act of 1986 are 

found in 18 USC, Chapter 109A. If an investigation detects a violation described in 

18 USC 109A (aggravated sexual abuse, sexual abuse, sexual abuse of a minor or 

ward, or abusive sexual contact) a complaint should be issued for a violation of a law 

3. Respondent failed to take action, which created a [hostile, intimidating, offensive] 

work environment, thus affecting the work performance of [name], a violation of 29 

CFR 1604.11, and 42 USC 2000e, Title VII. 

3. Respondent failed to report the incident to the Coast Guard, a violation of 46 

USC 10104(a). 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 4: SUSPENSION AND REVOCATION 

C4-26 

or regulation. Misconduct should not be used, as misconduct in 46 CFR Table 5.569, 

carries only a 1-3 month suspension. To reflect the seriousness of an offense listed 

in the Sexual Abuse Act, the recommended sentencing guidelines for a conviction is, 

at a minimum, imprisonment for not less than 6 months, and/or up to a $5000.00 

fine. Accordingly, a requested sanction of revocation would be appropriate. IOs 

shall be careful conducting investigations of cases involving sexual abuse due to the 

nature of the acts. Care shall be taken to ensure that the victim is not further harmed 

through improper questioning. Sexual offenses on documented vessels are a federal 

crime under 18 USC Chapter 109A, and may be appropriate for referral to the U.S. 

Attorney. Sample factual allegations: 

The Coast Guard alleges that: 

1. On May 1, 1995, while the M/V SEA was moored in Norfolk, VA, respondent 

offered Seaman [name] brownies laced with LSD. 

2. Respondent then had sex with Seaman [name] when she was in an impaired state, 

a violation of 18 USC 2241(b)(2)(B). 

1. On May 1, 1995, respondent forced Ordinary Seaman [name], to have sex by 

threatening her with death if she did not, a violation of 18 USC 2242. 

1. On April 15, 1995, while the M/V SEA was at sea, respondent was found by the 

master to have molested a minor female passenger, [NAME OF PERSON], by 

placing his hand on her private parts in a lewd and lascivious manner, a violation of 

18 USC 2243. 

B.5.b.4. Possession Of A Dangerous Weapon Or Explosive 

Compound 

The carrying or possession by any person of any dangerous weapon or explosive 

compound aboard a merchant vessel, without previously obtaining the permission of 

the owner or master of the vessel is prohibited by 18 USC 2277. The wearing of 

sheath knives aboard ship without the consent of the master is prohibited by 46 USC 

11506. This prohibition is repeated on the Shipping Articles, of which the master 

must inform every mariner offering to serve aboard his or her vessel. Sample factual 

allegations: 

The Coast Guard alleges that: 

1. On or about April 1, 1995, while the [vessel name] was at sea, the respondent had 

in his/her possession a dangerous weapon, a 32 caliber automatic pistol, without 

1. On May 1, 1994, while the M/V SEA was at sea, respondent threatened to "bust" 

Seaman Smith's skull if she continued to fight off his attempts to fondle her buttock 

and breasts, after she had asked him to stop, a violation of 18 USC 2144(2).
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 4: SUSPENSION AND REVOCATION 

C4-27 

permission of the master, a violation of 18 USC 2277. 

B.5.b.5. Possession Or Selling Of A Switchblade Knife 

The possession or sale of a switchblade knife aboard a U.S. vessel, in any location, is 

prohibited by 15 USC 1243. In such cases, the fact that permission was improperly 

granted by the master is immaterial. Sample factual allegations: 

The Coast Guard alleges that: 

1. On or about October 1, 1995, while the [vessel name] was at sea, respondent had 

in his/her possession a switchblade knife, a violation of 15 USC 1243. 

B.5.b.6. Use Of Alcoholic Beverages 

Law or regulation does not expressly prohibit the use of alcoholic beverages aboard 

commercial vessels, except in certain instances as specified in 33 CFR 95. Sample 

factual allegations: 

The Coast Guard alleges that: 

1. On or about August 1, 1995, while the vessel was at sea, respondent consumed 

approximately two cans of beer, while standing the 2400-0400 engineroom watch, a 

violation of 33 CFR 95.045. 

1. On or about 1700, 1 October 1995, while the vessel was at sea, respondent was 

found to be intoxicated as defined by 33 CFR 95.020. 

2. The respondent’s alcohol concentration in his/her blood was determined by 

breath analysis to be .07 per cent, a violation of 33 CFR 95.045.

1. On or about 2200, 25 December 1995, while the [vessel name] was at sea, 

respondent was found to be intoxicated as defined by 33 CFR 95.020 

2. The respondent’s superiors observed that his/her (manner, disposition, speech, 

muscular movement, general appearance, or behavior, as appropriate) was affected by 

the consumption of an intoxicant (specify intoxicant, if known), a violation of 33 

CFR 95.045. 

1. On or about July 1, 1995, while the [vessel name] was at sea, respondent had in 

his/her possession an explosive compound, nitroglycerine, without permission of the 

master, a violation of 18 USC 2277. 

1. On or about November 1, 1995, while the [vessel name] was at St. Thomas, V. I., 

respondent sold a switchblade knife to [name] a fellow crewmember, a violation of 

15 USC 1243. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 4: SUSPENSION AND REVOCATION 

C4-28 

B.5.b.7. Damaging Vessel, Stores, Or Cargo 

Willful damage to a vessel, its stores, or its cargo is prohibited under 46 USC 11501. 

Sample factual allegations: 

The Coast Guard alleges that: 

B.5.b.8. Resisting Coast Guard Personnel In 

Performance Of Duty 

The forcible assault, resisting, opposing, impeding, intimidation of, or interference 

with any federal officer (including Coast Guard marine safety personnel) engaged in 

performance of official duties is prohibited by 18 USC 111 and 2231. The use of 

deadly force or dangerous weapons in connection with these offenses carries 

additional heavy penalties. While such offenses occur infrequently, they interfere 

with law enforcement activities and a complaint shall be issued whenever they occur. 

Sample factual allegations: 

The Coast Guard alleges that: 

1. On or about April 1, 1995, while the [vessel name] was at Seattle, WA, respondent 

forcibly [assaulted, opposed, impeded, or intimidated] a U.S. Coast Guard officer, 

Lieutenant [name], during the performance of his official duties, a violation of 18 

USC 111. 

B.5.b.9. Mutiny And Conspiracy To Commit Mutiny 

The several elements related to inciting or conspiring to mutiny (18 USC 2192) and 

the act of mutiny (18 USC 2193). The offenses may occur while the vessel is in a 

harbor (foreign or domestic) or on the high seas. A rebellion by mariners against 

their officers on board a vessel anywhere within the admiralty jurisdiction of the 

United States may be punished as mutiny. It is the Commandant's policy to seek 

revocation of MMCs in cases of mutiny or conspiracy to commit mutiny (46 CFR 

5.61). [NOTE: Issuance of a complaint should be reserved for aggravated acts, 

attended by open revolt, usurpation of command, tumultuous rioting, conspiracy to 

commit such acts, and like offenses. Simple disobedience of orders should be treated 

as misconduct.] Sample factual allegation: 

The Coast Guard alleges that: 

1. On or about April 1, 1995, while the [vessel name] was at sea, respondent damaged 

the Number 4 lifeboat davit with a cutting torch, a violation of 46 USC 11501. 

2. Respondent [assaulted, opposed, impeded, or intimidated] LT [name] by [details]. 

1. On or about October 31, 1995, while the [vessel name] was at Staten Island, NY, 

respondent [combined, conspired, or confederated] with other members of the crew 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 4: SUSPENSION AND REVOCATION 

C4-29 

B.5.b.10. Unlawful Killing Of Another On Board 

Documented Vessels 

This factual allegation is patterned after those for murder and manslaughter under 18 

USC 1111 and 1112, respectively. It is the Commandant's position that the wrongful 

taking of a human life on board ship or on shore, with or without malice, intentional 

or not, should result in revocation of a mariner’s MMCs. If a mariner kills another 

human while on shore, the complaint should be issued for misconduct. Sample 

factual allegation: 

The Coast Guard alleges that: 

B.5.c. Negligence 

46 CFR 5.29 sets forth the definition of negligence. Issuing a complaint against a 

mariner for a particular act of negligence based on specific evidence is always 

preferable to issuing a complaint to the individual when the negligence is based solely 

on a presumption. For this reason and whenever practicable, evidence should be 

vigorously sought and fully developed concerning any specific acts or omissions, 

which singly, or in combination, constitute negligent behavior. See Appeal Decisions 

2455 (WARDELL) and 2465 (O’CONNELL). A watch officer who fails to post a 

lookout while the vessel is underway at night or under conditions of restricted 

visibility is negligent. A lookout that is not alert and fails to see an approaching 

vessel that is visible, and consequently fails to give warning to the bridge, is likewise 

guilty of negligence. Sample factual allegations: 

The Coast Guard alleges that: 

1. On or about January 11, 1995, while the [vessel name] was approaching the 

Galveston, Texas, Sea Buoy, respondent failed to adequately fix the position of the 

[vessel name], contributing to the grounding of the [vessel name]. 

1. On or about April 13, 1995, while the [vessel name] was at sea, respondent fell 

asleep while on lookout duty on the forecastle head. 

to make revolt or mutiny on board, a violation of 18 USC 2192. 

1. On or about November 1, 1995, while the [vessel name] was at sea [in foreign or 

domestic port], respondent intentionally killed [name], a fellow crewmember, with a 

fire axe, a violation of 18 USC 1111. 

1. On or about June 29, 1995, while the [vessel name] was navigating on the high 

seas [in navigable waters of the United States], during conditions of restricted 

visibility, respondent failed to obtain or properly use information available from radar 

observations to determine if a close quarters situation was developing and/or risk of 

collision existed from the [vessel name] detected by radar. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 4: SUSPENSION AND REVOCATION 

C4-30 

B.5.d. Incompetence 

As indicated in 46 CFR 5.31, a complaint for incompetence is based simply on 

inability on the part of a mariner to perform the duties required by the mariner’s 

MMC(s). The inability to perform may be due to professional deficiencies, physical 

disability, and mental incapacity or due to drug or alcohol abuse. It must be further 

verified that the disability continues to exist or may be presumed to exist at the time 

of the hearing. In each instance, the complaint will simply be "incompetence;" the 

factual allegation will set forth the appropriate facts. Professional deficiency is, 

generally speaking, shown by a course of action over a period of time indicating that 

the mariner should not be allowed to continue to serve in his/her rating. In some 

cases, such as ignorance of the Navigation Rules resulting in a collision, it may be 

indicated by one incident. Sample factual allegations: 

The Coast Guard alleges that: 

1. On February 15, 1995, respondent incorrectly plotted the 2400 dead reckoning 

position for the [vessel name] and was incompetent by his acts and omissions while 

standing deck watches on a foreign voyage. 

2. Respondent demonstrated that he did not possess and exercise the professional 

skills of an ordinary, prudent, licensed third mate. 

1. On or about January 19, 1995, while the [vessel name] was at sea, respondent 

suffered from seizures and was thus unable to perform his/her duties as able seaman. 

2. On or about February 1, 1995, while the [vessel name] was at sea, respondent 

suffered from seizures and was thus unable to perform his/her duties as able seaman. 

3. On or about March 1, 1995, while the [vessel name] was at sea, respondent 

suffered from seizures and was thus unable to perform his/her duties as able seaman. 

4. Respondent is presently still susceptible to seizures. 

1. On or about March 17. 1995, respondent was found to be mentally incompetent 

by Dr. [name], of the Jupiter Medical Center, because of his/her addition to [alcohol 

or (name of drug)]. 

B.5.e. Dangerous Drug Offenses 

Congress enacted 46 USC 7704 with the express purpose and intent of removing 

those individuals who possess or use drugs from service in the United States 

merchant marine. See House Report No. 338, 98th Cong., session 177 (1983).

Complaints may be issued against mariners for being a user of, or addicted to 

dangerous drugs and convictions for dangerous drug offenses under 46 USC 7704 

regardless of whether the individual was serving under authority of his or her 

MMC(s) at the time of the drug use or conviction. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 4: SUSPENSION AND REVOCATION 

C4-31 

B.5.e.1. Use or Addiction to Dangerous Drugs 

IOs shall seek revocation of MMCs if a chemical test administered under 33 CFR 

part 95 or 46 CFR part 16 indicates that a mariner is a user of dangerous drugs. 

Mariners suspected of use or addiction shall be issued a complaint in accordance with 

46 CFR 5.35. IOs should also issue complaints for use/addiction to dangerous drugs 

if the evidence of use is from a non-CG required test, i.e. a test conducted on behalf 

of the marine employee in accordance with company policy, and not required by part 

16 or authorized by part 95. CDOA 2560 (CLIFTON) states that “The mere fact 

that the specimen collection was for a purpose other than one authorized and subject 

to Coast Guard regulations is not reason to exclude the evidence. Once again, as 

long as the evidence is relevant and material, and not inherently incredible, it can be 

considered in a suspension and revocation hearing.” See also CDOA 2542 

(DEFORGE) which states “The Coast Guard, following the procedures of 46 CFR 

5, may offer evidence from any source, not only a drug test carried out pursuant to 

Part 16, to establish drug use in violation of 46 USC 7704.” Mariners should be 

given the opportunity to enter into a settlement agreement (see Section E) if he or 

she is willing to enter a rehabilitation program and prove non-association with 

dangerous drugs for 1 year after completion of a rehabilitation program. If the 

positive chemical test was the result of a required SMI test, IOs shall take the case 

before an ALJ, this type of case is not eligible for settlement. If the positive test was 

the result of a post casualty test conducted under the provision of 33 CFR 95, IOs 

should consider taking the case before an ALJ vice offering a settlement, especially if 

there is other evidence that the drug use contributed to the casualty. ALJs may stay 

the order of revocation pending the mariner's completion of a drug rehabilitation 

program and demonstration of non-association with dangerous drugs for 1 year after 

completion of a rehabilitation program. Sample factual allegations: 

The Coast Guard alleges that: 

1. On [date] respondent took a [type test] drug test. 

2. A [type sample] specimen was collected by [collector name] of [collection agency 

name]. 

3. The respondent signed a Federal Drug Testing Custody and Control Form. (if the 

test was 46 CFR Part 16 required test) 

4. The [type sample] specimen was collected and analyzed by [name of lab] using 

procedures approved by the Department of Transportation. 

B.5.e.2. Conviction of a Dangerous Drug Law 

Mariners who have been convicted of any Federal or State dangerous drug law 

offenses, within 10 years before the beginning of S&R proceeding, shall be issued a 

5. That specimen subsequently tested positive for [type drug] as determined by 

[name of MRO] a Medical Review Officer. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 4: SUSPENSION AND REVOCATION 

C4-32 

complaint in accordance with 46 CFR 5.35. See Section B.9 for guidance on 

appropriate sanctions. Sample factual allegations: 

The Coast Guard alleges that: 

1. Within the last 10 years, the respondent was convicted of possession of narcotics, 

to wit: heroin, by the U.S. District Court in Portland, Oregon. 

B.5.e.3. Investigating Officer's Discretion (Marijuana 

Convictions) 

IOs may exercise discretion in not issuing complaints under 46 USC 7704(b) for 

marijuana convictions only if the following guidelines are met. Prior to issuing a 

complaint, IOs shall take into account the intent of 46 USC 7704: the safety of life 

and property at sea. The following questions shall be addressed: 

• Is the marijuana conviction more than 5 years old? 

• Is there evidence of the mariner’s good character since the marijuana 

conviction? 

• Is this the only narcotic related offense on the mariner's record? 

• Is there any evidence of rehabilitation efforts? 

• Can you articulate reasons for believing that the mariner is no longer 

associated with drugs? 

• Did the marijuana conviction occur while the holder of MMCs rather than 

acting under the authority of the MMC? 

• Did the marijuana conviction involve simple possession (personal quantity) 

or one time use (experimentation) rather than trafficking? 

B.5.f. Conviction of an Offense Preventing 

Issuance/Renewal of MMC 

Mariners who have been convicted of an offense that would prevent the issuance or 

renewal of a MMC, shall be issued a complaint in accordance with 46 USC 7703(2) 

[Note: there is currently no regulatory cite for this offense]. The Commandant 

considers convictions for offenses detailed in 46 CFR 5.59 and 5.61 to be convictions 

that would preclude the issuance or renewal of MMCs. The Commandant also 

considers a conviction for an offense listed in tables 46 CFR 10.201(h) or 46 

CFR12.02-04(c), to be a conviction that would prevent the issuance or renewal of a 

1. On or about September 18, 1995, respondent receive a conviction from the State 

of Louisiana, for the sale and possession of opium. 

If the answer to any of the above is no, IOs shall issue a complaint for a drug law 

violation. See Section B.9 for guidance on appropriate sanctions. If all of the above 

criteria are met, IOs may issue a Letter Of Warning (LOW) instead of issuing a 

complaint. If a LOW is issued, details of the case and justification for the course of 

action shall be documenting in the MISLE warning enforcement activity. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 4: SUSPENSION AND REVOCATION 

C4-33 

MMC. See Section B.9 for guidance on appropriate sanctions. Sample factual 

allegations: 

The Coast Guard alleges that: 

1. On May 27, 2007, the respondent was convicted of Criminal Sexual ConductFourth Degree, by the State of Michigan. 

2. This is a conviction that would prevent the issuance of the respondent’s license. 

1. On September 18, 2005, respondent was convicted of Aggravated Assault by the 

State of Louisiana. 

B.5.g. Conviction of a NDRA Offense 

Mariners who have been convicted of an offense listed in section 205(a)(3)(A) or (B) 

of the NDRA of 1982 (49 USC 30304) within 3 years of initiation of S&R 

proceedings shall be issued a complaint in accordance with 46 USC 7703(3) [Note: 

there is currently no regulatory cite for this offense]. Offenses listed in section 

205(a)(3)(A) or (B) of the NDRA are: 

• Operation of a motor vehicle while under the influence of, or while impaired 

by alcohol or dangerous drugs; 

• Traffic violation(s) arising in connection with fatal traffic accidents; 

• Traffic violation(s) arising in connection with reckless driving; or 

• Traffic violation(s) arising in connection with racing on the highways. 

See Section B.9 for guidance on appropriate sanctions. Sample factual allegations: 

The Coast Guard alleges that: 

1. On September 23, 2007, the respondent was convicted of driving while under the 

influence of alcohol and/or drugs, by the Superior Court of California, County of 

San Diego, South County Division. 

B.5.h. Security Risk 

Mariners who have been deemed a security risk that poses a threat to the safety or 

security of a vessel or a structure located within or adjacent to the marine 

environment, shall be issued a complaint in accordance with 46 USC 7703(5) [Note: 

there is currently no regulatory cite for this offense]. See Section B.9 for guidance on 

appropriate sanctions. Sample factual allegations: 

2. This is a conviction that would prevent the renewal of the respondent’s MMD.

1. On September 18, 2007, the respondent was convicted evading an law 

enforcement officer with reckless driving, by the Superior Court of California, 

County of San Diego, South County Division.
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 4: SUSPENSION AND REVOCATION 

C4-34 

The Coast Guard alleges that: 

1. As of May 27, 2008, the respondent was included in the Federal Bureau of 

Investigation’s terror watchlist. 

2. By inclusion on the FBI’s terror watchlist, the respondent poses a threat to the 

security of a vessel or a structure located within or adjacent to the marine 

environment. 

1. On September 18, 2008, the respondent was denied a Transportation Worker’s 

Identification Credential by the Transportation Security Administration. 

B.6. SPECIAL 

CIRCUMSTANCES

B.6.a. Oil Pollution 

A complaint issued for an oil pollution incident may fall under negligence or 

misconduct, according to the circumstances. An IO must review each case in which 

S&R proceedings are being considered. As in other S&R investigations, any other 

courses of action detailed in 46 CFR 5.105 are available. This is a discretionary 

decision of IOs, based on facts developed by investigation. Sample factual 

allegations: 

The Coast Guard alleges that: 

[Negligence] 1. On or about 1 April 1995, respondent failed to adequately supervise 

cargo loading operations of the Tank Barge XYZ347. 

2. Approximately 500 gallons of oil was discharged into the XYZ River, a navigable 

water of the United States. 

[Misconduct] 1. On or about 1 July 1995, while assigned as person in charge of 

cargo oil transfer, respondent wrongfully was absent from the immediate vicinity of 

the Tank Vessel [name], which was discharging crude oil. 

2. The respondent was not available to shut down cargo operations in a timely 

manner after the cargo hose burst. 

B.7. OPTIONS FOR 

RESPONDENTS

2. In denying the issuance of a TWIC to the respondent, TSA determined that the 

respondent posed a threat to the security of a vessel or a structure located within or 

adjacent to the marine environment.

3. Approximately 50 gallons of oil entered the navigable waters of the United States. 

When issuing a complaint, the respondent should be advised of the options that are 

listed on the complaint and summarized below. The respondent should be made 

aware that he will have to answer the allegations or request an extension within 20 

days of receipt of the complaint. If the respondent admits the allegations, an ALJ 

will issue an order and enter a sanction. If the respondent denies any allegations, an 

ALJ will schedule a hearing on the matter. If the respondent requests an extension to 

file his/her answer, the request must explain why more time is needed and will be 

ruled on by an ALJ. The respondent should also be made aware that if he does not 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 4: SUSPENSION AND REVOCATION 

C4-35 

B.8.

RESPONDENT’S 

RIGHTS

When issuing a complaint, the respondent should be advised of his/her right to: 

• Have representation by counsel at the hearing, and that counsel may be, but 

need not be, a lawyer (NOTE: free legal aid may be available through the 

state bar or legal aid services);

• Have witnesses, records or other evidence subpoenaed; 

• Examine witnesses; 

• Cross-examine witnesses;

• Introduce relevant evidence into the record; and 

• Testify to facts or relevant information on his/her own behalf. 

B.9. PROPOSED 

ORDER

The complaint must contain a proposed order. IOs may use 46 CFR Table 5.569—

Suggested Range of an Appropriate Order—to assist them in determining an 

appropriate proposed order. IOs should also refer to 46 CFR 5.59 and 5.61 for 

offenses for which revocation should be sought and relevant CDOAs which contain 

the Commandant’s position on the appropriate sanction for various offenses. The 

proposed order on the complaint should reflect the sanction IOs are seeking to have 

the ALJ impose at the conclusion of the hearing. IOs may propose the following 

sanctions: 

• Admonishment. This is the least severe sanction that an ALJ can impose and 

is considered a formal warning from the ALJ.

• Suspension on Probation. This sanction includes suspension of a specific 

period of time (e.g., 3 months) and probation of a specific period of time 

(e.g., 9 months). This is commonly stated as “3 months suspension remitted 

on 9 months probation.” The terms of probation (e.g., successful completion 

of anger management counseling, not be issued a complaint for violation of 

the navigation rules, etc.) shall be listed on the complaint. The suspension is 

deferred during the probation period and will only become effective if the 

mariner violates the terms of probation. 

• Outright Suspension. This sanction is an outright suspension of a specific 

period of time (e.g., 12 months). This is commonly stated as “12 months 

outright suspension.” 

file an answer, request for extension, or attend any scheduled hearing, he may be 

found in default. Default constitutes an admission of all facts alleged in the 

complaint and a waiver of a right to a hearing. If the ALJ finds the respondent in 

default, a decision could be issued without any hearing. The respondent may request 

a settlement agreement with the Coast Guard. If an agreement is reached, a 

proposed settlement will be submitted to the ALJ for review and approval. If the 

ALJ approves the settlement, a consent order implementing the agreement will be 

issued. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 4: SUSPENSION AND REVOCATION 

C4-36 

• Suspension with Probation. This sanction includes an outright suspension of 

a specific period of time (e.g., 3 months) and a deferred suspension of a 

specific period of time (e.g., 12 months) and probation of a specific period of 

time (e.g., 24 months). This is commonly stated as “3 months outright 

suspension with 12 months suspension remitted on 24 months probation.” 

The probation period does not commence until completion of the outright 

suspension. The terms of probation (e.g., successful completion of anger 

management counseling, not be issued a complaint for violation of the 

navigation rules, etc.) shall be listed on the complaint. The deferred 

suspension will only become effective if the mariner violates the terms of 

probation. 

• Revocation. This is the most severe sanction that an ALJ can impose and 

requires the respondent to immediately surrender the respondent’s MMC(s) 

to the Coast Guard. 

B.9.a. Proposed Order for Drug Use/Addiction Cases 

B.9.b. Proposed Order for Drug Conviction Cases 

The appropriate order in dangerous drug law violation cases is usually revocation. 

IOs shall ensure the following provisions are met before recommending a sanction of 

less than revocation or offering a settlement agreement. 

• It has been more than 3 years since the conviction or the conviction is the 

only drug law violation in the previous 3 years. 

• The conviction involved personal use amounts (simple possession, etc.) 

rather than trafficking/attempt to distribute. 

• The mariner can establish cure as defined in section A.3.e. 

The following sections provide additional guidance on the appropriate proposed 

order for certain offenses. 

The appropriate order for all use/addiction to dangerous drug cases is revocation. It 

is clear that Congress felt drug users are a threat to the safety and security of life and 

property at sea and the marine environment and mariners must prove that they are 

cured of their drug use/addiction or their MMCs shall be revoked. In general, 

mariners that have had no previous complaints for drug use/addiction proved, or 

who have not previously voluntarily deposited or surrendered their MMC due to drug 

use/addiction may be offered a settlement agreement allowing them to prove cure. 

If the positive chemical test was the result of a required SMI test, IOs shall take the 

case before an ALJ, this type of case is not eligible for settlement. If the positive test 

was the result of a post casualty test conducted under the provision of 33 CFR 95, 

IOs should consider taking the case before an ALJ vice offering a settlement, 

especially if there is other evidence that the drug use contributed to the casualty. See 

section E for more guidance on settlement agreements. 

If either of the first 2 provisions is not met, the proposed order shall be revocation. 

If the conviction meets the first 2 provisions but the mariner has not established 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 4: SUSPENSION AND REVOCATION 

C4-37 

B.9.c. Proposed Order for Drug Test Refusal Cases 

B.9.d. Proposed Order for Misconduct for the Use, 

Possession, or Association with Dangerous Drugs 

The appropriate order for most cases involving misconduct for the use, wrongful 

possession, sale, or association with dangerous drugs is revocation. If the act of 

misconduct regarding the wrongful possession, use, or association meet the following 

provisions: 

• Involved personal use amounts; 

• Did not involve the sale, distribution, intent to distribute, trafficking, or 

smuggling of dangerous drugs; and 

cure, a settlement agreement may be offered to allow the mariner to establish cure. 

See section E for more guidance on settlement agreements. If the mariner meets all 

the above provisions IOs may propose a 12 month suspension remitted on 2 years 

probation with the condition of the probation being that the mariner is not convicted 

of a drug law violation during the period of probation. 

The appropriate sanction to seek for most refusals to submit to a required test for 

dangerous drugs is revocation. CDOA 2578 (CALLAHAN) states the reason why 

the sanction for refusal to test should be revocation, “Refusal to submit to a post 

incident chemical test raises a serious doubt about a mariner's ability to perform 

safely and competently in the future. Furthermore, if mariners could refuse to 

submit to chemical testing and face a lesser order, it is difficult to imagine why 

anyone that may have used drugs would ever consent to be tested. Cf. Exxon 

Shipping Co. v. Exxon Seaman's Union, 73 F.3d 1287 (3d Cir. 1996). See also CDOA 

2624 (DOWNS), and 2625 (ROBERTSON). NTSB Order No. EM-201 (MOORE) 

modified the revocation sanction of the ALJ that was affirmed by the Vice 

Commandant because the Coast Guard has articulated a 12-24 month suspension as 

appropriate (See 46 CFR Table 5.569) for refusal to take a chemical drug test. The 

decision further stated that NTSB will not uphold a sanction exceeding 24 months 

suspension without a clearly articulated explanation of aggravating factors. In all 

cases where IOs seek a revocation sanction, IOs shall provide aggravating factors to 

support revocation. Aggravating factors may include, but are not limited to: previous 

positive drug test, previous refusal to submit to drug or alcohol testing, other 

members of vessel crew testing positive or refusing to submit to testing, or previous 

violations of drug or alcohol testing regulations or company policy. If no aggravating 

factors exist, IOs should seek a 24 month suspension. If a respondent provides a 

legitimate reason for not submitting to a required drug test, IOs may propose an 

order of less than 24 months suspension. Respondents that admit they are a user of, 

or addicted to dangerous drugs may be offered a standard drug use settlement 

agreement. See Section E for more guidance on settlement agreements. A 

respondent that has refused to submit to a post casualty chemical test shall not be 

offered a settlement agreement; IOs shall instead take the case to a hearing seeking 

revocation. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 4: SUSPENSION AND REVOCATION 

C4-38 

• The mariner can demonstrate cure 

B.9.e. Proposed Order for Fraudulent Application Cases 

B.9.f. Proposed Order for NDRA Convictions 

The appropriate order for cases involving a conviction for an offense listed in the 

NDRA shall be based on the following guidelines. If within 3 years from the 

initiation of S&R proceedings: 

• There are 2 or more convictions which involved dangerous drugs or alcohol; 

or 

• There is 1 conviction that involved dangerous drugs or alcohol and 1 

conviction that did not involve dangerous drugs or alcohol; or 

• The State has revoked the mariner’s motor vehicle operator’s license; then 

The proposed order should be revocation. 

If within 3 years from the initiation of S&R proceedings: 

• There is 1 conviction that involved dangerous drugs or alcohol; then 

The proposed order should be a reasonable number of months of outright 

An IO may propose an order of 12 months suspension remitted on 2 years probation 

with the condition of the probation being that the mariner is not issued a complaint 

for misconduct for the use, possession or association with dangerous drugs during 

the period of probation. A Settlement agreement may be offered if the mariner 

meets the above provisions but cannot demonstrate cure, see Section E for more 

guidance on settlement agreements. 

The appropriate order for all cases involving misconduct for the submission of a 

fraudulent application for the issuance of a MMC is revocation. The Commandant 

has held that where fraud in the procurement of a license is proved in an S&R 

proceeding, revocation is the only appropriate sanction. See CDOA 2613 (SLACK), 

2570 (HARRIS), 2569 (TAYLOR), 2346 (WILLIAMS) and 2205 (ROBLES). Several 

CDOAs have recognized that there is a distinct difference between a fraudulent and a 

false statement. See CDOA 2663 (LAW), 2608 (SHEPHERD), 2456 (BURKE), 1381 

(CLINTON) and 809 (MARQUES). In CDOA 2608 (SHEPHERD), the 

Commandant found that the submission of a false application is a lesser included 

offense of submitting a fraudulent application. If there is no actual or constructive 

knowledge that the statement is false, it shall be considered a false statement. 

Conversely, if there is knowledge (actual or constructive) that the statement is false, it 

is intended to be misleading, or is recklessly made without knowledge of its truth or 

falsity, it may be considered a fraudulent statement. Actual knowledge can be

described as possessing “specific knowledge” of some material fact. If it is 

determined that statements in an application were not fraudulently made but merely 

the result of unintended misstatement or misunderstanding (i.e., a false statement), 

IOs may propose a sanction of a reasonable number months of outright suspension. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 4: SUSPENSION AND REVOCATION 

C4-39 

suspension. The minimum recommended suspension should be at least equal to any 

remaining suspension period assigned by a State of the mariner’s motor vehicle 

operator’s license. If the State has suspended a mariner’s motor vehicle license, but 

has issued the mariner a restricted license allowing operation of a motor vehicle, the 

suspension period may be remitted on probation. 

If within 3 years from the initiation of S&R proceedings: 

• There is 1 conviction that did not involve dangerous drugs or alcohol; then 

B.9.g. Proposed Order for Convictions Precluding 

Issuance of MMC 

B.9.h. Proposed Order for Being a Threat to Safety or 

Security of a Vessel or Structure 

B.10. PROPOSED 

DATES & LOCATION

B.10.a. Change Of Venue Or Time 

B.11. ADDRESS

The proposed order should be a reasonable number months of suspension on 

probation. The minimum probation period should be at least equal to any remaining 

suspension period assigned by a State of the mariner’s motor vehicle operator’s 

license. 

The appropriate order for cases involving a conviction for any offense similar to 

those detailed in 46 CFR 5.59 and 5.61, or a conviction for an offense listed in the 

tables of 46 CFR Subchapter B where the minimum assessment period is more than 

1 year is revocation. When the minimum assessment period in the tables of 46 CFR 

Subchapter B is 1 year, IOs may propose a sanction of a reasonable number of 

months based on the overall conviction record of the mariner. 

The appropriate order for all cases where the respondent is issued a complaint for 

being a security risk that poses a threat to the safety or security of a vessel or 

structure located in or adjacent to the marine environment is revocation. 

The complaint must contain proposed dates and a location for a hearing. If there are 

issues with witness availability or reasons why a specific location is desired, you 

should state them in this section. 

Once a complaint has been served, a request to move the hearing to any place other 

than that specified on the complaint or to change the time or date must be made to 

the ALJ initially convening the hearing. The ALJ will consider the nature of the 

request and the stated reason(s) for it; unless a change is ordered by the ALJ, the 

hearing will be held as scheduled. When a mariner requests a change of venue 

directly from the Coast Guard, the mariner shall be directed to contact the ALJ at the 

address and telephone number provided by the IO. 

The complaint must contain the address, phone number, and fax number of the 

issuing CG Unit and the name, rank, and title of the IO who filed the complaint. 

The respondent must also keep the IO informed of any changes to their address 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 4: SUSPENSION AND REVOCATION 

C4-40 

B.12. SERVING 

THE COMPLAINT

The complaint may be served by personal delivery, certified mail, return receipt, or 

express courier service with receipt capability (i.e. Federal Express, DHL, etc.). 

B.12.a. Temporary Suspension Complaint 

B.12.b. Time Limitations for Serving Complaints 

The following are the time limitations established in 46 CFR 5.55 for serving a 

complaint on the respondent for various offenses: 

• A complaint for drug use may be served at anytime, there is no time 

limitation. 

• A complaint for drug convictions must be served within 10 years of the date 

of conviction. 

• A complaint for misconduct for an offense listed in 46 CFR 5.59(a) or 5.61(a) 

must be served within 5 years of the offense or violation. 

• A complaint for all other offenses shall be served within 3 years of the 

offense or violation. 

B.12.c. Service of Complaints Considered Complete 

The service of a complaint is considered complete when the method of service is 

personal delivery and the complaint is: 

• Handed to the respondent; or 

• Delivered to the respondent’s office during business hours; or 

• Delivered to the respondent’s residence and service is made to a person of 

suitable age and discretion residing at the respondent’s residence. 

The service of a complaint is considered complete when the method of service is 

certified mail or express-courier service and the complaint is: 

• Delivered to the respondent’s residence and signed for by a person of suitable 

and/or phone number. 

IOs must file a complaint issued in a temporary suspension case immediately after 

serving it to the respondent with the Docketing Center. The rules for answers under 

33 CFR 20.308 do not apply. The Respondent answers at a pre-hearing conference 

(which may be telephonic). The ALJ will schedule this conference as early as 

practicable. The Respondent may file motions to have credentials returned and/or 

discontinue the expedited hearing and have the proceedings follow the normal 

hearing schedule as detailed in 33 CFR 20, Subpart G. The ALJ will issue a final 

decision within 45 days of the temporary suspension. 

The time period since the offense or violation shall exclude any period of time when 

the respondent could not attend a hearing or be served the complaint because they 

were outside the United States or were in prison or hospitalized.
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 4: SUSPENSION AND REVOCATION 

C4-41 

age and discretion residing at the respondent’s residence; or 

• Delivered to the respondent’s office during business hours and signed for by 

a person of suitable age and discretion. 

B.13. FILING 

WITH DOCKET CENTER

IOs shall file one copy of the complaint with the ALJ Docketing Center at the 

following address: 

ALJ Docketing Center 

U.S. Customs House 

40 South Gay Street, Room 412 

Baltimore, MD 21202-4022 

Phone: (410) 962-7434 

Fax: (410) 962-1742 or 962-1746 

Filing may be by mail, fax, or express courier service (i.e. FedEx). 

B.14. AMENDED 

COMPLAINT

B.15. COMPLAINT 

AND ANSWER FORMS

B.15.a. Complaint Forms 

B.15.b. Answer Forms 

Answer forms (Form CG-2639A) were created to give respondents a quick and easy 

way to file their answer. IOs should provide this form to each respondent. An 

answer template is located within the investigations community of CG Central and in 

the CG electronic forms library. The answer form’s use is optional and respondents 

may file any answer that complies with 33 CFR 20.303. 

Once the ALJ is assigned, the assignment order will direct the parties where to file 

subsequent documents. 

After a complaint has been filed with the Docketing Center and served on the 

respondent, but prior to the commencement of a hearing, if errors of substance are 

found in the complaint or in the factual allegations, IOs shall prepare, file with the 

Docketing Center and serve an amended complaint on the respondent. The 

amended complaint shall replace the original complaint and shall contain all required 

elements of a complaint listed above in section B.2. 

Complaint forms were designed so that IOs could address acts of misconduct, 

negligence, or violations of laws/regulations in the field if no further investigation is 

needed to initiate S&R proceedings. In most cases, there will be sufficient time to 

prepare a complaint in the office. IOs should use the electronic form templates 

provided in MISLE and within the investigations community of CG Central until 

such time as submission of all S&R filings are required to be made within MISLE. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 4: SUSPENSION AND REVOCATION 

C4-42 

B.16. TEMPORARY 

SUSPENSION 

COMPLAINT FORMS. 

C.1. REGULATIONS The regulations concerning pre-hearings and hearings can be found in: 

• Assignment of ALJ: 33 CFR 20.201 

• Unavailability of ALJ: 33 CFR 20.203 

• Conferences: 33 CFR 20.501 

• Discovery: 33 CFR Subpart F (20.601 - .609) 

• Hearings: 33 CFR Subpart G (20.701 - .710) 

C.2. FIELD 

REQUEST FOR 

MARINER'S PRIOR 

RECORD 

("MERMARPER") 

IOs should seek to obtain prior disciplinary information on merchant mariners. 

This information is known as a “MERMARPER.” MERMARPER records initiated 

prior to implementation of MINMOD (May 1992) are maintained by the National 

Maritime Center (NMC) on 3x5 index cards. A MERMARPER request to NMC 

should indicate the complete name of the respondent, respondent’s birth date, 

respondent’s current MMC number, and social security number; requests concerning 

more than one individual at a time may be combined. IOs should also check the 

information available in MISLE, including the wanted list as well as contacting NMC

for a MERMARPER. MERMARPER requests may be made to NMC by telephone 

or via the notify NMC function in the MISLE Enforcement Activity. The mariner's 

prior disciplinary record should be obtained through MISLE and from NMC prior 

to issuing a complaint, to determine whether: 

• A violation of a probationary order is involved; 

• An outstanding order is pending service; 

• Recidivism is a factor in the current offense; or 

• It should be considered as matters in aggravation. 

C.3. REVIEW OF 

INVESTIGATIVE CASE 

FILES

Complaint forms specifically designed for expedited hearings are available in MISLE 

and within the investigations community of CG Central. When used, they should 

only be served in person upon the respondent and a copy immediately faxed to the 

ALJ Docketing Center. 

C. PROCEDURES PRIOR TO HEARING

The prior records will neither prove nor disprove the facts of the current offense, 

and shall not be used as the sole basis for issuing a complaint. If the current 

offenses are proved in a hearing, however, the prior record will be introduced as 

matters in aggravation. 

IOs presenting the case shall be thoroughly familiar with all of the available 

evidence. IOs shall ensure that all documentary evidence such as Shipping Articles 

and log entries have been properly extracted and certified. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 4: SUSPENSION AND REVOCATION 

C4-43 

C.4. ORGANIZATION 

OF EVIDENCE

C.5. ASSIGNMENT 

OF AN ALJ 

C.6. SCHEDULING 

ORDER

If the case is a... 

Temporary suspension case 

Simple S&R Case 

Complex S&R Case 

C.7. SUMMARY 

DECISIONS. 33 CFR 20.901 allows IOs to submit a motion requesting the ALJ issue a summary 

decision in all or any part of the proceeding if there are no genuine issue of material 

fact and the CG is entitled to a decision as a matter of law. The motion must be 

filed no later than 15 days before the date of the hearing and the respondent has 10 

days to oppose the motion. Some scenarios which IOs may want to file a motion 

for a summary decision include, but are not limited to: 

• The mariner has a conviction for an offense listed in 46 CFR 5.59 or 5.61 

within the previous 5 years. 

• The mariner has a conviction for a violation of a dangerous drug law. 

• The mariner has submitted a fraudulent application for a MMC with regards 

to the failure to disclose a conviction that would have prevented the issuance 

of the MMC. 

C.8. MANDATORY 

DISCOVERY

In order to prevent surprise in S&R proceedings, the parties are required to share 

information about the evidence they intend to present at the hearing. The rules for 

discovery can be found at 33 CFR Part 20—Subpart F. At least 15 days before the 

scheduled hearing, the parties are to exchange: 

• Witness Lists which include the name of each witness and a brief summary 

of their expected testimony; and 

IOs must prove to the ALJ, by substantial evidence of a reliable and probative 

nature, that the allegations made against the respondent are true. Prior to the 

hearing, IOs should prepare the evidence in chronological order. It is helpful to 

prepare a list of questions for each witness. IOs are reminded that there is no 

substitute for adequate planning and careful preparation of a case. 

The Docketing Center assigns an ALJ to hear the case under 

33 CFR 20.201. IOs will receive a copy of the assignment order. The order directs 

the parties where to file motions and other filings. 

The ALJ considers the hearing location request in the complaint and the answer and 

schedules the hearing with a scheduling order. The following table shows the 

general guidelines for scheduling: 

Then the ALJ schedules the hearing to 

begin within... 

25 days of the temporary suspension. 

45 days of the filing of the Answer. 

30 days from close of discovery. 

Questions concerning the use of the summary decision option should be addressed 

to CG-5451. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 4: SUSPENSION AND REVOCATION 

C4-44 

• Copies, marked as exhibits, of each document intended to be introduced as 

evidence or used in the presentation of the case. 

C.9. OTHER 

DISCOVERY

Any other discovery will only be at the order of the ALJ and will occur only when 

the ALJ determines that: 

• It will not unreasonably delay the proceeding; 

• The information sought is not otherwise obtainable; 

• The information sought has significant probative value; 

• The information sought is neither cumulative nor repetitious; and 

• The method or scope of the discovery is not unduly burdensome and is the 

least burdensome available. 

C.10. PREHEARING 

CONFERENCES AND 

STIPULATIONS

C.10.a. Authority For Prehearing Conferences 

C.10.b. Discussions At Prehearing Conferences 

Matters appropriate for discussion and agreement at the prehearing conference 

include, but are not limited to: 

• Methods of service and filings; 

• Motions for consolidation or severance of parties or issues; 

• Motions for discovery; 

• Identification, simplification, and clarification of issues; 

• Requests for amendment of the pleadings; 

• Stipulations and admissions of fact and of the content and authenticity of 

documents; 

• Offers of settlement; 

Parties must request further discovery by motion. 

33 CFR 20.501(a) authorizes any party (IO, respondent, ALJ) by motion to request a 

conference. Unless the ALJ excuses a party, the failure of a party to attend or

participate in the conference, results in the party waiving all objections to any 

agreements reached in it and to any consequent orders or rulings. At the outset of 

the conference, the judge will normally advise the participants that the proceeding is 

being conducted in accordance with the provisions of 33 CFR 20.501. Although the 

conference may be informal, all remarks should be addressed to the ALJ. The ALJ 

should permit reasonable discussion; however, when a subject is fully ventilated, the 

ALJ will rule and move on. ALJs may conduct prehearing conferences for the 

settlement or simplification of issues involved in a case with the consent of the 

Coast Guard and the respondent. This authority comports with the provisions of 

the Administrative Procedure Act, which specifically permits such proceedings (see 

5 USC 556 (c)(6)). In order to establish maximum flexibility in the conduct of such 

conferences, no fixed rules are established; however, the following guidelines have 

been provided to the ALJs and will normally apply: 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 4: SUSPENSION AND REVOCATION 

C4-45 

• Proposed date, time and place of the hearing; and 

• Other matters that may aid in the disposition of the proceeding. 

C.10.c. Record Of Prehearing Conference 

C.11.

DEPOSITIONS. 

C.11.a. Who May Take Depositions 

C.11.b. Requests For Depositions 

33 CFR 20.605 provides that an ALJ may order a deposition only upon a showing of 

No one may stenographic report or otherwise record a conference without the 

authorization of the ALJ. During the conference, the ALJ may depose of any 

procedural matters on which they are authorized to rule. Actions taken at the 

conference, if authorized by the ALJ, may be memorialized in stenographic report, 

or a written transcript from a magnetic tape or the equivalent, or the ALJ may make 

a statement on the record at the hearing summarizing the actions taken at the 

conference.

33 CFR 20.605 contains the regulations governing depositions. A deposition is the 

recording and transcribing of testimony under oath of a person who is not going to 

be present at the hearing upon the approval of the ALJ of a motion made by any 

party. Depositions are generally required because the witness is located beyond the 

range of a subpoena to require the witness to attend the hearing. A deposition taken 

under oath and bearing the signature of the deponent is admissible in a proceeding. 

This testimony is generally taken through oral examinations similar to those 

employed at the hearing. It may also be videotaped or taken via telephone 

conference call upon such terms, conditions, and arrangements as are prescribed in 

the order of the ALJ. For simplification, where only specific answers are required, 

prepared questions and cross-questions from the respondent are approved by the 

ALJ, read to the deponent and answered, and returned to the judge, who will admit 

them subject to the rules of evidence. These are called interrogatories or crossinterrogatories. Live testimony via telephone may be the preferred alternative to a 

deposition (See section G.8). Assistance in preparing for a deposition may be 

obtained from the servicing District legal division. 

The deposition may be taken before any disinterested person authorized to 

administer oaths in the place where the deposition is to be taken. Within the Coast 

Guard, this includes commissioned and warrant officers and those persons 

specifically engaged in the performance of duties under 46 USC Chapter 77. 

Outside the Coast Guard, this includes a judge, magistrate, commissioner, clerk of 

court, notary public, or judge advocate of an armed service. Within a foreign

country, a deposition may be taken before a person having power to administer 

oaths in that location, or before a secretary of an embassy or legation, consul 

general, consul, vice consul or consular agent of the United States, or before such 

other person or officer as may be agreed upon by the parties by written stipulation 

filed with the ALJ. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 4: SUSPENSION AND REVOCATION 

C4-46 

good cause and upon a finding that: 

• The information sought is not obtainable by more readily alternative 

methods; or 

• There is a substantial reason to believe that relevant and probative evidence 

may otherwise not be preserved for presentation at the hearing. 

Any party may file a motion requesting that testimony be taken by deposition. The 

motion must contain the following: 

• The purpose and scope of the deposition; 

• The time and place it is to be taken; 

• The name and address of the person before whom the deposition is to be 

taken; 

• The name and address of each witness from whom a deposition is to be 

taken; 

• The documents and materials which the witness is to produce; 

• Whether it is intended that the deposition be used at a hearing instead of live 

testimony; and 

• If the deposition is to be by oral examination, by written interrogatories, or a 

combination of the two. 

C.11.c. Procedure 

C.11.d. Objections 

Upon a showing of good cause the ALJ may enter, and serve upon the parties, an 

order to obtain the testimony of the witness 

The person presiding over the deposition shall place the witness under oath or 

affirmation, and the other parties shall have the right to cross-examine. The witness 

being deposed may have counsel or another representative present during the 

deposition. The party requesting the deposition shall make appropriate 

arrangements for necessary facilities and personnel. The testimony shall be taken 

stenographically and transcribed at the expense of the party requesting the 

deposition. Unless waived by the deponent, the transcription must be read by or 

read to the deponent, subscribed by the deponent, and certified by the person 

before whom the deposition was taken. See C.11.e. below concerning videotaped 

depositions. 

Objection to taking a deposition because of the disqualification of the officer before 

whom it is to be taken is waived unless made before the taking of the deposition 

begins, or as soon as the disqualification becomes known or could have been 

discovered with reasonable diligence. During the taking of a deposition, a party or 

the witness may request suspension of the deposition on the grounds of bad faith in 

the conduct of the examination, oppression of the witness or party, or improper 

questioning or conduct. Upon request for suspension, the deposition will be 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 4: SUSPENSION AND REVOCATION 

C4-47 

C.11.e. Videotaped Depositions 

C.12.

NOTIFICATION TO 

OTHER AGENCIES

C.13. ISSUANCE 

OF SUBPOENAS

C.14. WITHDRAWAL 

OF COMPLAINT PRIOR 

TO HEARING

C.15. PROCEDURES 

IN LIEU OF A

HEARING

adjourned. The objecting party or witness must immediately move the ALJ for a 

ruling on the objection(s). The ALJ may then limit the scope or manner of the 

taking of the deposition. 

33 CFR 20.605(n) authorizes testimony at a deposition hearing to be recorded on 

videotape for subsequent presentation at an S&R hearing. Visual observation of a 

witness’s demeanor can assist the ALJ in making credibility evaluations. 

Videotaping expenses are to be borne by the party requesting the recording. 

Testimony may be taken through oral examination or by interrogatories. The 

person requesting the videotape deposition is responsible for procuring appropriate 

equipment for playback at the hearing. IOs should verify this to ensure that delays, 

or worse, do not result from the attempted use of incompatible equipment. The 

deposition becomes a part of the record of the proceedings in the same manner as a 

transcribed deposition. The videotape, if admitted into evidence, will be played 

during the hearing and transcribed into the record by the reporter. 

Often the subject matter of a hearing will be of interest to other agencies, such as 

the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), the Immigration and 

Naturalization Service (INS), the FBI, or local law enforcement agencies. As 

appropriate, local representatives of these interests should be advised of the time 

and place of such hearings. 

At any time prior to the hearing, IOs may issue subpoenas to secure the attendance 

of witnesses or the production of books, papers, or other evidence that may be 

needed by the Coast Guard or by the respondent. During the hearing, the ALJ may 

issue subpoenas for such purposes or upon request of the Coast Guard or the 

respondent. 46 USC 7705 provides the authority to issue subpoenas and is 

implemented in 46 CFR Part 5, Subpart F. The subpoena may be served anywhere 

within the judicial district in which it is to be returned, or if outside the district, at a 

place within 100 miles of the place to which it is returnable. 

Occasionally, an IO may want to withdraw the complaint prior to the convening of 

a hearing: a last minute voluntary deposit or voluntary surrender agreement may be 

completed, additional evidence may indicate that the complaint is unwarranted, or it 

may be determined that complaint was not properly served in accordance with 33 

CFR 20.304. If the respondent has not served a responsive pleading (i.e. Answer), 

IOs shall submit a notice of withdrawal to the Docketing Center with a copy to the 

respondent. If the respondent has filed a responsive pleading, IOs shall file a 

motion for withdrawal with the Docketing Center with a copy to the ALJ (if an ALJ 

has been assigned) and respondent. 

Investigations shall be conducted to provide, as thorough information as possible, to 

determine what official action, if any, should be taken against mariners or the 

mariner’s MMC(s). S&R proceedings need not be used in all instances, but rather 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 4: SUSPENSION AND REVOCATION 

C4-48 

C.15.a. Letters of Warning 

C.15.b. Voluntary Deposit Of MMCs For Mental Or 

Physical Incompetence 

C.15.c. Mariners Deemed Incompetent Who Do Not Enter 

Into A Voluntary Deposit 

C.15.d. Voluntary Deposit Of MMCs For Addiction To 

Dangerous Drugs As A Cause Of Incompetence 

when marine safety, security, or the marine environment has been directly and 

adversely affected. The severity of the act or offense, the gravity of the situation, 

availability of other corrective action, the prior history of the mariner, and the likely 

impact of such action on similar incidents in the future are factors, which should 

influence the choice of actions taken. Consideration must also be given to the 

responsibilities of masters, owners, and operators of vessels in maintaining the 

standards of competence and disciplined conduct in the U.S. Merchant Marine. 

Civil penalty action against holders of MMCs is authorized at the discretion of the 

OCMI. Additional civil penalty guidance is contained in Chapter C3 of this manual. 

The following sections provide guidance on other alternative actions. 

46 CFR 5.105(e) authorizes IOs to issue Letters of Warning (LOW) in lieu of 

pursuing S&R action. Details on the issuance of LOWs are contained in Chapter C2 

of this Manual. 

Under the provision of 46 CFR 5.201, a Voluntary Deposit can only be offered in 

cases where there is evidence of mental or physical incompetence. A medical

condition by itself is not incompetence; for example, an epileptic who can control 

the condition through medication should not be issued a complaint for 

incompetence unless evidence is available that his professional performance is 

hindered by his condition. If the condition prevents the mariner from performing 

duties directly related to the safe operation or navigation of the vessel, a voluntary 

deposit may be properly considered. Prior to accepting a voluntary deposit, IOs 

shall explain to the mariner that the deposited MMCs cannot be returned until the 

Coast Guard receives satisfactory evidence that the mariner is considered fit for duty 

without qualification, and that the mariner must initiate action to regain his or her 

MMCs. If the mariner agrees to these conditions, IOs shall complete a Voluntary 

Deposit Agreement, Form CG-2639F, in duplicate. After the mariner has signed 

both copies in ink, IOs shall give the original to the mariner and retain a copy in the 

case file. The form shall be scanned and attached to the MISLE enforcement 

activity as correspondence. IOs shall notify NMC via the notify NMC function in 

the MISLE Enforcement Activity requesting that the mariner’s record be locked 

while the MMC is on deposit. Form CG-2639F is available within the investigations 

community of CG Central and in the CG electronic forms library. 

When a mariner who has been certified by proper medical authority as physically or 

mentally incompetent will not voluntarily deposit his/her MMCs, S&R proceedings 

shall be initiated. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 4: SUSPENSION AND REVOCATION 

C4-49 

C.15.d.1. Voluntary Deposits In Drug Investigations 

C.15.d.2. Acceptance Of Voluntary Deposits 

Where the mental or physical incompetence of a holder of MMCs is caused by use 

of, or addiction to dangerous drugs, a voluntary deposit will only be accepted 

contingent on the following circumstances: 

• The holder intends to enroll in a bona fide drug rehabilitation program; 

• The holder's incompetence did not cause or contribute to a marine casualty; 

• The incompetence was reported to the Coast Guard by the individual or any 

other person and was not discovered as a result of a Federal, State, or local 

government investigation; and 

• The holder has not voluntarily deposited or surrendered his/her MMCs, or 

had his/her MMCs revoked for a drug related offense on a prior occasion. 

C.15.e. Voluntary Deposit Of MMCs For Alcoholism As A 

Cause Of Incompetence 

46 CFR 5.201(b) discusses the use of a voluntary deposit where the mental or

physical incompetence has occurred resulting from the use of, or addiction to 

dangerous drugs. The use of a voluntary deposit is only appropriate in those 

instances where the use and/or addiction is not discovered as a result of a Federal, 

State or local government investigation, i.e. the mariner voluntarily admits his drug 

problem. The discovery of a drug problem through the chemical testing 

mechanisms of 46 CFR 16 or 33 CFR 95 is considered to be discovered as part of an 

investigation and therefore a voluntary deposit shall not be used.

IOs shall screen all requests for voluntary deposit to ensure that the request has not 

been prompted by a Coast Guard mandated chemical test. This includes mariners 

who are scheduled to take a test, but feel, or know they will have a positive result, 

and those who have been notified by a MRO of a positive test. All cases shall be 

handled through the voluntary surrender, settlement agreement or hearing process. 

Voluntary deposits, which were prompted by a positive chemical test, shall be 

considered "null and void" and the MMCs returned to the mariner, together with a 

complaint and an explanation of the options available. 

If the mariner agrees to these conditions, IOs shall complete a Voluntary Deposit 

Agreement (Drug or Alcohol), Form CG-2639G, in duplicate. After the mariner has 

signed both copies in ink, IOs shall give the original to the mariner and retain a copy 

in the case file. The unit copy of the form shall be scanned and attached to the 

MISLE enforcement activity as correspondence. IOs shall notify NMC via the 

notify NMC function in the MISLE Enforcement Activity requesting that the 

mariner’s record be locked while the MMC is on deposit. Form CG-2639G is 

available within the investigations community of CG Central and in the CG

electronic forms library. 

46 CFR 5.201(c) discusses the use of a voluntary deposit where the mental or
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 4: SUSPENSION AND REVOCATION 

C4-50 

C.15.e.1. Voluntary Deposits In Alcohol Abuse 

Investigations 

In considering whether to initiate S&R proceedings for offenses involving alcohol, 

IOs must recognize the distinction between the disease of alcoholism and mere 

intoxication or alcohol abuse. It is not intended that misconduct involving mere 

intoxication should be punished any differently than instances of "sober" 

misconduct. However, if alcoholism, alcohol abuse, or intoxication is considered to 

be a factor in the case, it is appropriate to issue a complaint for "incompetence based 

on alcoholism," in addition to any misconduct complaint. On this basis, cases 

involving alcoholism should be handled in a manner similar to other cases of 

physical or mental incompetence. The Respondent may produce probative evidence 

of rehabilitation which may influence a final determination regarding the mariner's 

competency. To support the return of voluntarily deposited MMCs, IOs may accept 

similar evidence. 

C.15.e.2. Acceptance Of Voluntary Deposits 

Where the mental or physical incompetence of a holder of MMCs is caused by use 

or addiction to alcohol, a voluntary deposit will only be accepted contingent on the 

following circumstances: 

• The holder intends to enroll in a bona fide alcohol rehabilitation program; 

• The holder's incompetence did not cause or contribute to a marine casualty; 

and 

• The incompetence was reported to the Coast Guard by the individual or any 

other person and was not discovered as a result of a Federal, State, or local 

government investigation. 

physical incompetence has occurred resulting from the use of, or addiction to 

alcohol. The use of a voluntary deposit is only appropriate in those instances where 

the use and/or addiction is not discovered as a result of a Federal, State or local 

government investigation, i.e. the mariner voluntarily admits his alcohol problem. 

The discovery of an alcohol problem through the chemical testing mechanisms of 46 

CFR 4.06 or 33 CFR 95 is considered to be discovered as part of an investigation 

and therefore a voluntary deposit shall not be used. The Coast Guard recognizes 

alcoholism as a disease and acknowledges that there are successful programs for the 

prevention and treatment of alcoholism. It is not the Coast Guard's policy to 

compel merchant mariners with alcoholism to enter such programs, but rather to 

encourage sincere individuals to obtain the medical help they need. While the Coast 

Guard cannot endorse or recommend a specific facility or program, IOs should be 

familiar with locally available resources in order to provide information to merchant 

mariners requiring assistance of this nature. 

If the mariner agrees to these conditions, IOs shall complete a Voluntary Deposit 

Agreement (Drug or Alcohol), Form CG-2639G, in duplicate. After the mariner has 

signed both copies in ink, IOs shall give the original to the mariner and retain a copy 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 4: SUSPENSION AND REVOCATION 

C4-51 

C.15.f. Written Agreement 

C.15.g. Limiting Conditions For Voluntary Deposits 

C.15.h. Disposition Of Deposited MMCs 

The deposited MMC shall be retained at the unit until the mariner completes the 

conditions set out in the agreement for the return of the MMC. If the MMC expires 

while in the CG’s possession it shall be destroyed or clearly defaced as expired/void. 

IOs shall notify NMC via the notify NMC function in the MISLE Enforcement 

Activity that the MMC has expired while it was on deposit and that it has been 

destroyed or marked as expired/void. 

C.15.i. Return Of MMCs 

A person may request the return of his or her voluntarily deposited MMCs at any 

time, provided; 

• They he or she can demonstrate a satisfactory rehabilitation or cure of the 

condition which caused the incompetence; 

• They have complied with any other conditions of the written agreement 

executed at the time of deposit; and 

• They comply with the physical and professional requirements for issuance of 

MMCs. 

C.15.i.1. Return Where Drug Use/Abuse Was Cause Of 

Incompetence 

Where the voluntary deposit is based on incompetence due to drug use/abuse, the 

deposit agreement shall provide that the MMCs will not be returned until the 

mariner: 

in the case file. The unit copy of the form shall be scanned and attached to the 

MISLE enforcement activity as correspondence. IOs shall notify NMC via the 

notify NMC function in the MISLE Enforcement Activity requesting that the 

mariner’s record be locked while the MMC is on deposit. Form CG-2639G is 

available within the investigations community of CG Central and in the CG

electronic forms library. 

A mariner may voluntarily deposit his/her MMCs with the Coast Guard in any case 

where there is evidence of mental or physical incompetence as described above. A 

voluntary deposit is accepted on the basis of a written agreement, the original of 

which will be given to the mariner, which specifies the condition upon which the 

Coast Guard will return the MMCs to the holder. 

Where the conditions of paragraphs C.15.d.2 or C.15.e.2 above are not met, the 

mariner may only surrender his/her MMCs in accordance with 46 CFR 5.203, or 

S&R proceedings must be initiated. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 4: SUSPENSION AND REVOCATION 

C4-52 

• Successfully completes a bona fide drug abuse rehabilitation program; 

• Demonstrates complete non-association with dangerous drugs for a 

minimum of 6 months after completion of the rehabilitation program; and 

• Is actively participating in a bona fide drug monitoring program, which 

incorporates random unannounced chemical testing. 

C.15.i.2. Return Where Alcohol Use/Abuse Was Cause Of 

Incompetence 

Where the voluntary deposit is based on incompetence due to alcohol use/abuse, 

the deposit agreement shall provide that the MMCs will not be returned until the 

mariner: 

• Successfully completes a bona fide alcohol abuse rehabilitation program; and 

• Is actively participating in a bona fide support group. 

C.15.j. Acceptance Of Medical Reports 

A medical report indicating that a mariner is fit for duty need not be accepted 

without question. The designation of fit for duty requires a careful evaluation 

balancing the mariner's past medical history, his/her current physical/mental 

condition, and future medical outlook against the mariner’s ability to live and 

perform safely in a shipboard environment. In some instances, IOs may reasonably 

conduct this evaluation, and the deposited MMCs may be returned to the mariner. 

IOs may consult with the physician attesting to the mariner’s fitness concerning a 

mariner's prior medical history and shipboard duties for this purpose. Prior to 

releasing the medical history to the physician, the consent of the mariner shall be 

obtained. In certain instances, however, a proper evaluation will be considered to be 

beyond the scope of an IO's expertise and discretion. These instances include cases 

involving: 

• Convulsive disorders, such as epilepsy;

• Psychiatric illnesses; and 

• Complicated or conflicting medical data in which the mariner's ability to live 

and perform safely in a shipboard environment is unclear to IOs.

C.16. GOOD-FAITH 

DEPOSITS

In such instances, and whenever IOs desire, the mariner's medical history, along 

with pertinent physician's evaluation, and the IO/OCMI case remarks shall be 

forwarded to Commandant (CG-5451) who will request a determination from the 

Chief of the Medical Branch at the National Maritime Center. If it is determined 

that the mariner is permanently not fit for sea duty, the MMC shall be returned and a 

complaint for incompetence shall be issued. 

Mariners may make a "good-faith" deposit of his/her MMC(s) to IOs conducting an 

investigation, when the mariner desires that any action be taken at a different port, 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 4: SUSPENSION AND REVOCATION 

C4-53 

C.17. VOLUNTARY 

SURRENDER

46 CFR 5.203 contains provisions for voluntary surrender of MMCs in lieu of a 

hearing to answer a complaint. Before agreeing to accept voluntarily surrendered 

MMCs, IOs shall ensure that the mariner is: 

• Shown a copy of the complaint, and informed the ability to request a time 

and place for a hearing before an ALJ; 

• Advised of the right to counsel at the hearing; and 

• Informed of the possible consequences, favorable and unfavorable, of a 

hearing. 

or when the mariner requests a delay for any reason and the IO agrees. This process 

ensures the mariner's appearance at another time or place. IOs should agree to a 

change of date or location only if satisfied that it will not prejudice the government's 

position. Before agreeing to a change IOs should consider the availability of 

witnesses and the reliability of documentary evidence. Transfer of jurisdiction 

strictly for the convenience of the mariner should be done only if the mariner is 

willing to make a good-faith deposit; otherwise, a complaint should be issued. In 

cases for which there is evidence of misconduct, when the mariner requests that the 

case be transferred to another CG unit, IOs should issue a complaint; at the initial 

hearing, the mariner can request a change of venue (location) from the ALJ. The 

ALJ can so order, provided that change of venue will not adversely affect the 

government's case and is not requested solely for purposes of delay. In cases when 

the sailing of a vessel precludes immediate convening of a hearing, subpoenas 

should not be issued to compel attendance. Rather, the investigative file should be 

forwarded to the OCMI at the port of destination, with a request for an IO to meet 

the vessel. A good-faith deposit shall not be accepted from a mariner who must 

continue to serve under his/her MMC(s) in order to meet the vessel's obligations or 

if the mariner is attempting to complete an alcohol/drug rehabilitation program. A 

written agreement may be executed on Form CG-2639I, in duplicate. Both copies 

shall be signed in ink by the mariner, the IO, and any witnesses. A copy shall be 

given to the mariner and the other copy maintained in the unit case file. The unit 

copy of the form shall be scanned and attached to the MISLE enforcement activity 

as correspondence. IOs shall notify NMC via the notify NMC function in the 

MISLE Enforcement Activity requesting that the mariner’s record be locked while 

the MMC is on deposit. Form CG-2639I is available within the investigations 

community of CG Central and in the CG electronic forms library. 

Before accepting a voluntary surrender of a MMC for any act or offense, IOs should 

inform the mariner that a voluntary surrender is equivalent to a revocation; the only 

means for the mariner to be allowed to apply for a new MMC is through the 

administrative clemency process (see 46 CFR 5.901). [NOTE: The Commandant 

reserves the right to return any MMCs which have been voluntarily surrendered.] 

IOs shall ensure that the mariner understands the rights and the consequences 

indicated above before entering into a voluntary surrender agreement. A written 

agreement may be executed on Form CG-2639E, in duplicate. Both copies shall be 

signed in ink by the mariner, the IO, and any witnesses. A copy shall be given to the 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 4: SUSPENSION AND REVOCATION 

C4-54 

D.1. INTRODUCTION

D.2. REGULATIONS The regulations that pertain to defaults are found in: 

• Default by Respondent; 33 CFR 20.310 

• Failure to Appear; 33 CFR 20.705 

D.3. WHEN TO 

FILE A DEFAULT 

MOTION

D.4. THE DEFAULT 

MOTION

D.5.

RESPONDENT’S 

RESPONSE

The Respondent has 20 days to file a reply to the default motion. 

D.6. PROOF OF 

SERVICE OF MOTION 

FOR DEFAULT

mariner and the other copy maintained in the unit case file. The unit copy of the 

form shall be scanned and attached to the MISLE enforcement activity as 

correspondence. IOs shall notify NMC via the notify NMC function in the MISLE 

Enforcement Activity requesting that the mariner’s record be locked due to the 

mariner surrendering the MMC. The notification should also state that the MMC 

was destroyed or clearly defaced as void/invalid (for cases involving possible

criminal charges for forgery). Form CG-2639E is available within the investigations 

community of CG Central and in the CG electronic forms library. 

D. DEFAULTS

The default process replaced the in absentia hearing in the S&R process. 

IOs may file a default motion if the respondent fails to file a timely answer to the 

complaint without a showing of good cause for not timely answering the complaint. 

If an answer from the respondent is not received within 25 days of serving the 

complaint, IOs should contact the Docketing Center. If the respondent has not 

filed an answer, the clerk will supply a certificate of answer attesting that no answer 

was filed. 

IOs must file a motion to obtain a default order. The motion must conform to the 

requirements of 33 CFR 20.302 (Filing of Documents), 20.303 (Form and Content) 

and 20.304 (Service). The motion must also include a proposed decision. A default 

motion template is available within the investigations community of CG Central. 

IOs must file the motion with the Docketing Center, file a copy with the ALJ 

assigned to the case (if an ALJ has been assigned), and serve a copy on the 

respondent. IOs must serve a copy on the respondent in person, via certified mail 

or by express-courier service that has receipt capability (i.e. FedEx, DHL, etc.). IOs 

must also include proof of service of the complaint with the motion for default. If 

the complaint was served in person, the certificate of service for the complaint 

should be submitted as proof of service. 

Until MISLE requires electronic filing of the motion with the Docketing Center, 

IOs must submit a certificate of service when filing the motion with the Docketing 

Center. Except in the case of personal service, the certificate of service does not 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 4: SUSPENSION AND REVOCATION 

C4-55 

D.7. ORDER

D.8. SETTING 

ASIDE DEFAULTS

D.9. FAILURE TO 

APPEAR AT HEARING

D.10. AUTOMATIC 

DISMISSAL OF 

COMPLAINT

E.1. INTRODUCTION

show proof of service. Once proof of service is obtained IOs must file a return of 

service document with the Docketing Center that contains the proof of service of 

the motion.

Upon finding the respondent in default, the ALJ issues a decision against the 

respondent. If the ALJ finds that the respondent had good cause not to answer or 

appear, the ALJ will set aside the finding of default. 

With relaxed service rules it is likely that defaults will be set aside (purged) if a 

respondent can establish that he/she was at sea or otherwise unavailable for 

legitimate reasons. Respondents can file a motion or a petition to reopen or set 

aside the default order at any time. If the respondent demonstrates good cause, the 

default may be set aside. The decision to set aside a default is solely at the ALJ’s 

discretion. If IOs believes that the respondent deliberately avoided service, IOs 

should oppose the motion or petition. Otherwise, the respondent should be given 

an opportunity to be heard. 

If a respondent fails to appear at a hearing or conference, IOs may make a motion 

with the ALJ requesting that the ALJ enter a default against a respondent. The ALJ 

will issue an order to show cause why a default should not be entered. The 

respondent has 30 days to establish good cause for his/her failure to appear. 

A complaint will be automatically dismissed without prejudice 90 days after the 

answer period expires if an answer or default motion is not filed with the Docketing 

Center. If this happens IOs will need to reissue the complaint to the respondent. 

E. SETTLEMENT AGREEMENTS

A settlement agreement is designed to expedite the administrative hearing process, 

not by pass it. In a hearing, the ALJ can only impose sanctions against the MMCs. 

A settlement agreement allows IOs to impose remedial actions such as specific 

training, or requirements for cure. IOs should review the case prior to making a 

decision on the use of a settlement agreement. If the MMC(s) are to be suspended 

or revoked, the respondent shall deposit his/her MMC(s) with the Coast Guard 

prior to signing the settlement agreement. Settlement agreements must not require 

routine reports or submissions to the ALJ during the settlement period. If IOs 

wants to review the respondent’s reports at regular intervals during the settlement 

period, the settlement agreement should spell out those requirements. Ultimately, it 

is the respondent’s responsibility to demonstrate successful completion of the terms 

of the agreement. A settlement agreement shall not be used when a complaint for 

professional incompetence is issued. Additionally, if an investigation indicates there 

was intentional misconduct or negligence that caused serious injury, death, major 

damage to property, or significant environmental damage, a settlement agreement 

should not be used. Questions concerning the proper use of settlement agreements 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 4: SUSPENSION AND REVOCATION 

C4-56 

E.2. REGULATIONS The regulations concerning settlement agreements can be found at: 

• Conferences; 33 CFR 20.501 

• Settlements; 33 CFR 20.502 

E.3. WHEN TO 

FILE SETTLEMENT 

AGREEMENTS

IOs can file a settlement agreement at anytime after the complaint is filed. It can be 

filed with the complaint. If filing the settlement agreement with the complaint, 

ensure the respondent does not also file an answer. If filing a settlement agreement 

before an ALJ is assigned, the Docketing Center will assign an ALJ and send the 

settlement file to the ALJ’s office. After an ALJ is assigned, parties should file 

settlement agreements directly with the assigned ALJ. 

E.4. SETTLEMENT 

TYPES

In general, a settlement agreement allows IOs to impose remedial actions such as 

specific training, allows for the proof of cure of drug or alcohol use/addiction, or 

allows IOs to offer a mitigated sanction to mariners that have been cooperative and 

do not require remedial actions. Settlement agreement templates are available in 

MISLE and within the investigations community of CG Central. 

E.4.a. Drug Use/Addiction 

should be addressed to Commandant (CG-5451). 

Mariners that have had no previous complaints for drug use/addiction proved, or 

who have not previously voluntarily deposited or surrendered their MMC(s) due to 

drug use/addiction may be offered a settlement agreement allowing them to prove 

cure. A mariner that has previously successfully completed the cure requirements 

shall only be offered a settlement to prove cure again, if it has been at least 3 years 

from the completion of the cure requirements and a Substance Abuse Professional 

(SAP), meeting the requirements of 49 CFR 40.281 or a Medical Review Officer 

(MRO), meeting the requirements of 49 CFR 40.121, has determined that the 

mariner is still a viable candidate for cure. If the mariner does not meet the above 

or if the positive chemical test was the result of require SMI testing IOs shall not 

offer a settlement and should instead take the case to a hearing seeking revocation. 

The mariner must admit to the jurisdictional and factual allegations of the complaint. 

To ensure a nationally consistent approach to dealing with drug users, the drug 

settlement agreement template approved by CG-5451 and available within the 

investigations community of CG Central and in MISLE shall be used. This standard 

agreement requires the respondent to provide proof of cure as defined in CDOA 

2535 (SWEENEY), CDOA 2634 (BARRETTA) and CDOA 2638 

(PASQUARELLA). The settlement agreement states that the MMC(s) are revoked, 

but that the revocation is stayed to allow the respondent to establish cure. The 

settlement agreement establishes a deadline for the respondent to enroll in, and 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 4: SUSPENSION AND REVOCATION 

C4-57 

E.4.a.1. Amending Standard Drug Use Settlement 

Agreement 

E.4.b. Drug Conviction and Misconduct for Use, 

Possession, or Association 

successfully complete an accredited drug rehabilitation program and provides that 

the stayed sanction of revocation takes effect immediately upon notice of noncompliance by IOs to the Docketing Center. IOs shall require that the respondent 

provide a minimum of 12 (this may be increase by IOs if the particulars of the case 

warrant) random, unannounced drug tests during the 1-year non-association period 

that commences after successful completion of the rehabilitation program, to be 

spread reasonably throughout the year, that are conducted in accordance with

Department of Transportation procedures found in Title 49, Code of Federal 

Regulations (CFR), Part 40. The respondent shall be required to attend a substance 

abuse monitoring program (such as AA/NA) for a minimum period of one-year 

following successful completion of the drug rehabilitation program. At a minimum, 

the respondent should be required to attend at least 2 meetings a month, this may be 

increased by IOs if the particulars of the case warrant. The respondent is also 

required to obtain and file a copy of a letter from a MRO attesting that mariner is 

drug-free and that the risk of subsequent use of dangerous drugs is sufficiently low 

to justify the mariner’s return to work. If a respondent fails a drug test while 

completing the rehabilitation program and requests that the time to complete the 

program be extended, IOs may extend the deadline subject to the provisions of E.5 

below. The MRO must concur with the assessment that the respondent is still a 

viable candidate for rehabilitation. If a respondent fails one of the random drug 

tests required during the 1-year non-association period, IOs shall file a notice of 

failure to complete. If the respondent successfully completes all the requirements of 

the settlement agreement, the order will be modified to reflect that the MMC(s) was 

suspended outright for the period of deposit. The length of the suspension will be 

the time required to complete the drug rehabilitation program and the mandatory 1-

year non-association period required after completion of the rehabilitation program 

(typically 13 – 15 months). 

Mariner’s that have completed an accredited drug rehabilitation program before a 

complaint has been issued or a settlement agreement offered should be given credit 

for the completion of rehabilitation. The drug use settlement agreement should be 

modified to reflect that the parties agree that the Respondent has successfully 

completed an accredited rehabilitation program. The mariner shall be required to 

demonstrate 1-year of non-association with dangerous drugs and their MMC(s) shall 

be in the Coast Guard’s possession during the 1 year period. All drug use 

settlements must include the requirement for the Respondent to deposit his/her 

MMC(s) for a minimum of 1 year to demonstrate non-association. 

Settlement agreements may be offered to respondents convicted of drug related 

offense(s) and those issued a complaint for misconduct for use, possession, or 

association with dangerous drugs that meet the provisions of Sections B.9.b and 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 4: SUSPENSION AND REVOCATION 

C4-58 

E.4.c. Alcohol Use/Addiction 

Settlement agreements may be offered to respondents who are willing to admit to 

the jurisdiction and factual allegations of the complaint and desire to seek treatment 

for their alcohol related problems. If the alcohol use/addiction was discovered as 

the result of post casualty testing, IOs shall not offer a settlement and should instead 

take the case to a hearing seeking revocation. The following conditions shall be 

required of the respondent: 

• Completion of a state or local government licensed or recognized alcohol 

rehabilitation program; and 

• Participation in AA meetings for a one-year-period after completion of the 

rehabilitation program, at a minimum of two meetings per month. 

E.4.d. Mitigated Sanction With Conditions 

E.4.e. Mitigated Sanction 

B.9.d respectfully with the exception of being able to demonstrate cure. If the 

respondent is shown by a recent evaluation of a SAP, meeting the requirements of 

49 CFR 40.281, or a MRO, meeting the requirements of 49 CFR 40.121, or by other 

evidence to be a user of, or addicted to, dangerous drugs, the standard drug 

settlement agreement shall be used. If the respondent is shown by a recent 

evaluation of a SAP, meeting the requirements of 49 CFR 40.281, or a MRO,

meeting the requirements of 49 CFR 40.121, to not be a user of, or addicted to, 

dangerous drugs, then the standard drug settlement agreement shall be amended by 

removing the requirement to enroll in and successfully complete a drug 

rehabilitation program and reducing the minimum number of random drug tests to 

6 during the 1-year non-association period. All other conditions of the standard 

drug settlement agreement shall apply. 

Proof may be provided by submitting attendance records, certificates of 

achievement, or certification from his/her sponsor attesting to attendance and 

participation in support group meetings. The sanction for failure to comply with the 

above conditions should be revocation. 

IOs may offer a mitigated sanction with conditions to mariners that have been 

cooperative during the investigation and have made a good faith effort to reach 

compliance, but would benefit from additional remedial actions. Any remedial

action proposed should be designed to correct the cause of the misconduct or 

negligence. Remedial training relating to the incident; and/or therapy or 

professional counseling. The settlement agreement shall have a table that lists the 

appropriate orders for compliance and non-compliance with the terms of the 

agreement. The sanction for non-compliance should match the proposed order 

from the complaint. 

IOs may offer a mitigated sanction to mariners that have been cooperative during 

the investigation and have made a good faith effort to reach compliance and if their 

actions that led to the issuance of the complaint do not necessitate remedial actions 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 4: SUSPENSION AND REVOCATION 

C4-59 

E.5. EXTENSION OF 

AGREEMENT

E.6. FAILURE TO 

COMPLY WITH 

AGREEMENT

E.7. COMPLYING 

WITH AGREEMENT

F.1. LEGAL 

ASSISTANCE

such as specific training, or requirements for cure. The mitigated sanction should be 

based on low end of the range from 46 CFR 5, Table 5.569 – “Suggested Range of 

an Appropriate Order.” 

Settlement agreements that require conditions to be met within a specific timeframe 

may be extended by mutual agreement of the IO and the respondent for up to 90 

days without the approval of the ALJ. IOs shall file a notice of extension of 

settlement agreement with the Docketing Center. If IOs opposes the extension of 

the agreement, the respondent shall be directed to file a motion with the ALJ 

requesting an extension, and IOs shall file a reply detailing the reasons in opposition 

of the extension. If the agreement needs to be extended by a period greater than 90 

days, the party requesting the extension shall file a motion requesting the extension 

with the ALJ. A notice of extension of settlement agreement template is available in 

MISLE and within the investigations community of CG Central. 

The penalty for non-compliance shall be contained in the agreement and shall be 

self-effecting. Thus, if the respondent does not comply with the conditions of the 

settlement agreement the sanction is automatically imposed against the MMC(s). If 

IOs discover non-compliance with the terms of the settlement, IOs may file the 

notice of failure to complete settlement agreement with the Docketing Center 

immediately after discover of the non-compliance or may wait until the end of the 

period of the agreement to file such notice. The notice of failure to complete must 

be served on the respondent and a certificate of service filed with the Docketing 

Center at the time of filing the notice. The notice may be served by mail, personal 

delivery, fax, or express-courier service. A notice of failure to complete settlement 

agreement template is available in MISLE and within the investigations community 

of CG Central. 

If the conditions of the settlement agreement are complied with, IOs shall file a 

notice of completion of settlement agreement with the Docketing Center and the 

order will be modified to reflect the agreed upon sanction. The notice of 

completion must be served on the respondent and a certificate of service filed with 

the Docketing Center at the time of filing the notice. The notice may be served by 

mail, personal delivery, fax, or express-courier service. A notice of completion of 

settlement agreement template is available in MISLE and within the investigations 

community of CG Central. 

F. HEARINGS

Legal assistance can be requested from Area, MLC or District legal offices for any 

S&R case which the prosecuting unit needs assistance in preparing for the hearing or 

representing the Coast Guard at the hearing. Anytime a request for legal assistance 

is denied, notification of the denial shall be made to Commandant (CG-5451). 

Another source of legal assistance can be found at the 5 Sectors that are billeted 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 4: SUSPENSION AND REVOCATION 

C4-60 

F.2. HEARING 

COSTS

F.3. WITNESS 

FEES

F.4. PREHEARING 

INTERVIEWS

F.5. EXPEDITED 

HEARINGS

F.5.a. Pre-hearing Conference 

At the pre-hearing conference, IOs shall be prepared to: 

• Identify and simplify issues in dispute and prepare an agreed statement of 

issues, facts, and defenses; 

• Establish simplified procedures; 

• Discuss witnesses and exhibits (the ALJ will issue an order directing the 

with an attorney in the Investigations division. The following Sectors have attorney 

billets: New York, Delaware Bay, New Orleans, Houston, and LA/LB. 

Coordination of the use of this resource should be made between the Senior 

Investigating Officers for the involved units. 

The ALJ Docketing Center is responsible for costs associated with conducting a 

hearing. This includes transcripts, court reporters, and the hearing room. 

Duly subpoenaed witnesses, other than Federal government employees may request 

payment for their attendance by submitting Standard Form 1157. The party that 

called the witness must pay witness fees. Fees and allowances will be paid as 

provided by 28 USC 1821, except that an expert witness may be paid a higher fee to 

be fixed by the District Commander. The unit shall request funding from their 

servicing Area, MLC or District legal office for paying all fees for witnesses 

subpoenaed by IOs. If funding is not available, the unit is responsible for paying the 

witness fees. 

IOs should attempt to anticipate the sequence of events in the hearing. IOs should 

interview witnesses beforehand to evaluate the information that they will give under 

oath. The names, addresses, and telephone numbers of potential witnesses who 

were not subpoenaed previously should be readily available. If, during the course of 

the hearing, testimony from such persons is necessary, IOs may request a 

continuance of the hearing and issuance of subpoenas from the ALJ. 

46 USC 7702(d) authorizes the Coast Guard to temporarily suspend and take 

possession of a mariner’s MMC(s) for up to 45 days. If this occurs, a hearing must 

be held within 30 days of the temporary suspension (i.e., CG taking possession of 

the MMC). The regulations that cover expedited hearings can be found in 33 CFR 

Part 20 (1201 – 1209). IOs must file the temporary suspension complaint with the 

Docketing Center immediately after it is served on the respondent. The rules for 

answers under 33 CFR 20.308 does not apply. The respondent will answer at a prehearing conference, which may be telephonic, the ALJ will schedule this conference 

as early as practicable. The respondent may file motions to have his/her MMC(s) 

returned and/or discontinue the expedited hearing and proceed under the normal 

hearing process (Subpart G of 33 CFR 20). The ALJ will issue a final decision 

within 45 days of the temporary suspension. The rules governing Appeals in 

Subpart J of 33 CFR 20 apply. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 4: SUSPENSION AND REVOCATION 

C4-61 

exchange of witness lists and exhibits); and 

• Schedule the hearing. 

F.6. DECORUM

F.7. PRODUCTION 

OF MMCS

F.8. OFFENSES F.8.a. Dismissal 

F.8.b. Amendment of Complaint at Hearing 

F.9. OPENING 

STATEMENTS

F.9.a. By the IO 

Any issues that remain in dispute after the pre-hearing conference will be 

adjudicated at a hearing conducted under Subpart G of 33 CFR 20. 

The Commandant has long stressed the remedial nature of the hearing; thus, a 

balance of dignity and informality is desirable. Coast Guard personnel shall be 

attired in the uniform of the day and shall conduct themselves in an appropriate 

manner at all times. The ALJ may announce any special instructions for the hearing.

Since a complaint is typically issued against all MMCs issued to a mariner, the 

respondent must understand the requirement to bring all of his/her MMCs to the 

hearing. Failure to produce them will delay the orderly procedure of the hearing. 

For the record, the respondent shall be asked whether he/she has produced all 

MMCs that have been issued to him/her. Outstanding MMCs shall be produced 

prior to conclusion of the hearing or otherwise accounted for. 

If, at any point during the hearing, IOs determine that a complaint has been 

incorrectly issued to a mariner or that the complaint or factual allegation(s) has no 

basis, IOs shall move to dismiss the complaint/factual allegation, with or without 

prejudice. Dismissal with prejudice means that the respondent may not be issued a 

complaint again for that offense; dismissal without prejudice means that the 

respondent may be issued a complaint again for that offense at a later date. If it is 

determined that an offense was committed, but the complaint was incorrectly 

drafted or served, IOs should request dismissal without prejudice and issue a new 

complaint. 

The ALJ may, on his or her own motion or the motion of the Coast Guard or 

respondent, permit the amendment of the complaint and factual allegations to 

correct minor errors by deletion or substitution of words or figures, provided that a 

legally sufficient factual allegation remains. When errors of substance are found in 

the complaint or factual allegations, the ALJ shall order the defective complaint or 

factual allegation dismissed with or without prejudice. If dismissed without 

prejudice, IOs may then prepare and serve a new complaint/factual allegation on the 

respondent. 

If the respondent denies the complaint and allegations, IOs shall make a statement 

outlining the matters they expect to prove, including any relevant details that may 

not have been captured in the factual allegations. IOs should explain his/her theory 

of the case, the elements of the offense, and the evidence that will prove each 

element. If the respondent changes his answer and admits to the complaint and 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 4: SUSPENSION AND REVOCATION 

C4-62 

F.9.b. Opening Statement in Negligence Cases 

F.9.c. By/On Behalf of the Respondent 

The respondent or the respondent's counsel will have an opportunity to state the 

respondent's side of the case; this opportunity may be waived or deferred. If the 

respondent changes his answer and admits to the complaint and allegations the 

respondent or respondent’s counsel may present evidence or make a statement 

regarding mitigating circumstances that he/she believes to be material. Should this 

evidence or statement be inconsistent with an answer of admit, the ALJ must reject 

the answer, change it to deny and proceed with the hearing. 

F.10. EVIDENCE

F.10.a. Prima Facie Evidence 

allegations, the opening statement need only summarize the evidence upon which 

the complaint and factual allegations were based. 

Whether issuing a complaint against a mariner for actual or presumed negligence, 

IOs should briefly, but clearly, outline in the opening statement the basis for the 

Coast Guard's determination that the respondent's acts or decisions were negligent; 

the nature of the applicable standard of care by which the respondent's action were 

measured; and the exact nature of the evidence which will be presented to prove the 

allegation. The importance of this initial step in the hearing cannot be 

overemphasized. It affords IOs the first and best opportunity to focus the ALJ's 

attention on the exact issues the Coast Guard feels are pertinent and to begin 

establishing the validity of the Coast Guard's case. 

33 CFR 20, Subpart H (20.801 – 809) contains the rules for evidence in a S&R 

hearing. See also Chapter B3 of this manual for a discussion of evidence. IOs and 

respondents may present their case or defense by oral, documentary, or 

demonstrative evidence; submit rebuttal evidence; and conduct any crossexamination that may be necessary for a full and true disclosure of the facts. 

Hearsay evidence is admissible in S&R proceedings; the ALJ will consider the fact 

that evidence is hearsay when determining its probative value. One difference 

between the old evidence rules in 46 CFR Part 5 and the rules in 33 CFR Part 20 is 

the limitation on the admissibility of admissions made by a Respondent. The rule is 

now limited only to casualty investigations conducted under 46 CFR Part 4. The 

exception for impeaching the credibility of the respondent’s evidence still applies. 

Admissions made during all personnel action investigations are now admissible. See

33 CFR 20.1311 

Prima facie evidence is that which is sufficient on its face to establish a fact as 

alleged. For example, an official logbook entry concerning an offense enumerated in 

46 USC 11501, made in substantial compliance with 46 USC 11502 will establish, 

prima facie, the facts it contains. A prima facie case, by contrast, is a collection of 

evidence that is sufficient for a finding that a factual allegation is proved. However, 

it is subject to rebuttal by the defense, after which the ALJ must decide whether to 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 4: SUSPENSION AND REVOCATION 

C4-63 

F.10.b. Standard Of Care in Negligence Cases 

F.10.c. Presumption of Drug Use 

46 CFR 16.201(b) establishes a presumption that an individual who test positive in a 

drug test conducting under Part 16 will be presumed to be a user of dangerous 

drugs. IOs, in order to establish the presumption, must prove: 

• That the respondent was the individual who was tested for dangerous drugs; 

• That the respondent failed the test; and 

• That the test was conducted in accordance with Part 16. 

F.11. OFFICIAL 

MARINE RECORDS

F.11.a. Shipping Articles, Form CG-705A, 735T, Or 

Equivalent 

believe all the evidence of the prima facie case. An official logbook entry does not 

establish a prima facie case unless it contains every element of the factual allegation. 

IOs have the burden of proving the case by a preponderance of the evidence [See

CDOA 2472 (GARDNER)]. 

IOs may establish an applicable standard of care in several ways. These include, but 

are not limited to, submission of expert witness testimony concerning prudent 

marine practices; reference to existing laws or regulations such as the Navigation 

Rules or navigation safety regulations which require specific acts under various 

conditions; reference to existing CDOAs which address prudent marine practices; 

reference to other well known publications which address the subject such as; 

Griffin On Collision, Knight's Modern Seamanship, Tug, Tow and Pilotage, and 

United States Coast Pilots. 

This proof establishes a prime facie case of use of a dangerous drug and shifts the 

burden of going forward with evidence to the respondent to rebut this presumption. 

In considering the proof of all the above elements, it should be kept in mind that 

minor technical infractions of the regulations do not violate due process unless the 

infraction breaches the chain of custody or violations the specimen’s integrity. If the 

respondent produces no evidence in rebuttal, the ALJ may find the complaint of use 

of a dangerous drug proved on the basis of the presumption alone. See CDOA 

2603 (HACKSTAFF), 2592 (MASON), 2584 (SHAKESPEARE), 2560 

(CLIFTON), 2555 (LAVALLAIS), 2379 (DRUM) and 2279 (LEWIS). 

IOs, the Coast Guard representative, any other commissioned officer of the Coast 

Guard, or any official custodian of extracts from shipping articles, logbooks, or 

records in the custody of the Coast Guard may authenticate and certify the extracts. 

Authentication and certification must include a statement that the person 

authenticating the record has seen the original, compared the copy with it, and 

found the copy to be a true one. This person shall sign his/her name and identify 

himself/herself by rank or title and by duty station.

These constitute the contractual agreement between the master and members of the 

crew; 46 USC 10302 sets forth the particulars to be included for foreign or 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 4: SUSPENSION AND REVOCATION 

C4-64 

F.11.b. Official Logbooks 

F.11.c. Other Logbooks 

F.11.d. Use Of Foreign Records 

intercoastal voyages (See NVIC 1-86). When the vessel will be making a foreign 

voyage, they are referred to as "foreign" articles; when the vessel is engaged on a 

coastwise voyage, they are called "coastwise" articles. 

Under 46 USC 11301, vessels making foreign and intercoastal voyages are required 

to have an "Official Logbook" and to make certain entries in them. Logbook entries 

may be introduced at hearings. Those concerning offenses listed in 46 USC 11501 

and made in accordance with 46 USC 11502 may constitute prima facie evidence of 

the facts they recite. Official logbook entries concerning offenses that are not 

enumerated in 46 USC 11501 do not constitute prima facie evidence. Nevertheless, 

if the entry is made in substantial compliance with 46 USC 11502, it is admissible 

and may receive added weight from the ALJ. [NOTE: If logbook entries are relied 

upon to prove a factual allegation, they should be examined carefully to ensure that 

they recite sufficient facts to prove all matters alleged. The bare conclusion, even in 

a logbook, that the mariner committed a certain offense, is not sufficient.] 

Photocopies shall be certified on the reverse side as in the following example: "I 

hereby certify that I have seen the original logbook and that the obverse of this 

sheet is true and correct copy of page 47, book I, the Official Logbook of the (vessel 

name), for the voyage commencing February 1, 1994 [dated and signed by the IO, 

including rank and duty station]." When the extracts are typewritten, only those 

entries pertinent to the case need be extracted. They shall be certified as in the 

following example: "I hereby certify that I have examined the Official Logbook, 

compared the above extract with it, and found it to be a true and correct copy of all 

entries pertaining to [name] on page 17, book II of the Official Logbook of the 

(vessel name) for the voyage commencing June 31, 1995 [dated and signed by the 

IO, including rank and duty station]." 

Deck logs, weather logs, engineroom logs, and etc., may be introduced as evidence. 

The ALJ may admit any relevant oral, documentary, or demonstrative evidence, 

unless privileged. Relevant evidence is evidence tending to make the existence of 

any material fact more probable or less probable than it would be without the 

evidence. 

An official record or document of a foreign country may be evidenced by an

authenticated copy, summary, or excerpt, under the Federal Rules of Evidence, Rule 

902(3). That Rule provides that foreign records may be authenticated by a certificate 

made by a secretary of an embassy or legation, a consul general, consul, vice consul, 

or consular agent of the U.S. and authenticated by the seal of that person's office. A 

foreign official, so authorized by the laws of that official's country may also 

authenticate his or her country's documents. In many cases, properly authenticated 

foreign records of court actions, hospitalizations, etc., are important evidence. Prior 

to the hearing, IOs should make every reasonable effort to obtain such records. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 4: SUSPENSION AND REVOCATION 

C4-65 

F.12. OFFICIAL 

NOTICE. 

F.13. WRITTEN 

TESTIMONY

F.14.

EXAMINATION OF 

WITNESSES. 

F.14.a. Preliminary Examination 

F.14.b. Direct Examination 

Foreign records must be translated, as necessary, and authenticated by an 

appropriate official. Assistance may be obtained from the servicing District legal 

division. 

33 CFR 20.806 authorizes the ALJ to take official notice of such matters as could 

courts, or of other facts within the specialized knowledge of the Coast Guard as an 

expert body. IOs should use this mechanism whenever appropriate to further focus 

the ALJ's attention on areas of relevant interest, whether specified in regulation or 

not. 

33 CFR 20.808 allows the ALJ to enter into the record the written testimony of a 

witness. The principal requirement is that the other party must be supplied with the 

testimony prior to the hearing and the witness must be made available for crossexamination that can be written as well. The statement must be sworn to, or 

affirmed, under penalty of perjury. Such testimony is useful for expert witnesses and 

technical witnesses. It is not very useful for witnesses who are testifying as to what 

they saw or heard. 

Testimony at hearing sessions may be received from witnesses actually present or 

telephonically from witnesses whose attendance is not available. Telephonic 

testimony is authorized by 33 CFR 20.707 and ALJs have been encouraged to use 

this means to assist in achieving financial savings and judicial efficiency. The 

specifics should be resolved via a pre-hearing conference or at a hearing session 

prior to the call being initiated. Experience has shown this means to be effective for 

"routine" testimony from distant witnesses including those aboard vessels equipped 

for voice communications via satellite. Telephone testimony becomes more 

complicated when complex legal issues and/or exhibits are involved. The following 

examination procedures apply whether witnesses are present or their testimony is 

taken via telephone. 

IOs have the burden of establishing a prima facie case by the introduction of 

testimony of witnesses and documentary evidence (such as excerpts from Official 

Logbooks). When issuing subpoenas for witnesses, IOs must consider the time 

necessary for direct and cross-examination, to conserve the time of all parties 

involved. For example, if IOs believe that the testimony of a single witness will 

consume most of a day, IOs should avoid summoning other witnesses for that day. 

IOs must present evidence from witnesses through proper questioning; IOs should 

be aware of the testimony that can reasonably be expected from the Coast Guard's 

witnesses. It is helpful to have a prepared outline of the questions that will be asked 

of each witness. This enables IOs to review those questions in advance to ensure 

they are not legally objectionable. In questioning a witness, IOs must avoid "leading 

the witness"; that is, asking questions that suggest a desired answer. Before 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 4: SUSPENSION AND REVOCATION 

C4-66 

F.14.c. Cross-Examination 

F.14.d. Re-cross And Redirect Examination 

F.14.e. Respondent's Rebuttal in Negligence Cases 

questioning a witness with respect to a document to be entered into evidence, IOs 

must "lay a foundation" by showing the document to the witness and asking if the 

witness recognizes it and, if so, what he/she recognizes it to be; the document is 

then submitted into evidence. If the document is admitted into evidence by the 

ALJ, IOs may thereupon question the witness with respect to the document. If 

there is an objection, either to the form of a question or to an answer by the witness, 

the ALJ will afford an opportunity to both sides to argue on the validity or nonvalidity of the objections. All factual allegations must be proved through direct 

examination of witnesses and introduction of evidence. 

When the Coast Guard has completed questioning the witness, the defense may 

cross-examine. The scope of cross-examination should be confined to matters 

brought up in the direct examination, although proper questions may be asked to 

impeach the credibility of the witness. As a practical matter, however, respondents 

(and non-professional counsel) frequently introduce matters not brought out in 

direct examination. Although this is technically improper, it may be allowed unless 

the issue becomes so clouded that the record is distorted or unnecessarily expanded. 

Leading questions are proper on cross-examination and may be employed freely, 

except for the purpose of eliciting new matter. 

After cross-examination, IOs may question the witness further on redirect 

examination; the respondent may then re-cross-examine. There is no limit to the 

number of times that either party has to examine a witness, although parties are 

generally satisfied with a brief redirect or re-cross-examination. However, ALJs may 

limit re-examination. In particular, redirect is often restricted to matters included in 

the preceding cross-examination. 

When only a presumption of negligence exists, IOs have the discretion to determine 

whether or not a complaint should be issued. As previously indicated, this decision 

should be based on a careful evaluation of all pertinent information available. 

However, if a complaint is issued and the respondent presents evidence at a hearing 

concerning his version of events, IOs should be ready to rebut that evidence. IOs 

should not rely on the ALJ to announce during the hearing whether the respondent 

has provided a "credible, no-fault explanation" for his actions. IOs should therefore 

expect as a worst-case scenario that the ALJ will consider the presumption of

negligence to have been rebutted and that the burden to proceed will shift back to 

the Coast Guard. At a minimum, IOs should be well prepared to strenuously crossexamine the respondent and/or the respondent's witnesses. Other options include 

the calling of Coast Guard rebuttal witnesses, expert or otherwise, and the 

presentation of any additional Coast Guard rebuttal evidence, to counter the 

respondent's explanation. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 4: SUSPENSION AND REVOCATION 

C4-67 

F.14.f. ALJ's Examination/Excusal Of The Witness 

F.14.g. Medical Evidence In Incompetence Cases 

F.15.

CONTINUANCES AND 

ADJOURNMENTS

F.16.

DISPOSITION OF 

MMCS WHEN 

REVOCATION IS 

STAYED PENDING 

CURE

The ALJ may, at any time, question a witness to clarify the issue before the ALJ. It 

is suggested that the ALJ wait until both direct and cross-examination are 

completed. When both parties and the ALJ have concluded their examination, the 

witness should be excused. The witness shall be admonished not to discuss the 

testimony, or any matter of which he/she has become aware through the hearing, 

with anyone until the conclusion of the hearing or unless directed to do so by

competent authority. 

The testimony of a physician or clinical records may not be required in all hearings. 

When such evidence is necessary for the presentation of the Coast Guard's case, and 

is so ordered by the ALJ, the costs associated with the examination and production 

of records or testimony will be borne by the Coast Guard. The respondent may 

produce medical evidence in his/her own behalf, at his/her expense. If the 

respondent fails, or refuses, to undergo any such examination, the failure or refusal 

receives due weight and may be sufficient for the ALJ to infer that the results would 

have been adverse to the respondent. 

For good cause IOs or the respondent may move by making a motion to "continue" 

the hearing from day to day, or to adjourn the hearing to another date or location. 

In ruling on this motion, the ALJ must first consider the future availability of 

witnesses and the prompt dispatch of the vessel(s) involved. When the respondent 

makes such motions, IOs should prepare to counter them if such an order would be 

detrimental to the Coast Guard's case. When a hearing is continued or adjourned, 

the ALJ will return all MMC(s) to the respondent upon demand, provided that a 

prima facie case has not been established that the respondent poses a definite danger 

to the safety of life or the vessel. In CDOA 2535 (SWEENEY) and CDOR 18 

(CLAY), the Commandant determined that when the Coast Guard proves use of an 

illegal drug, the mariner poses a threat to public health, public safety, and safety of 

life at sea until he has proven he is cured. Therefore, in drug use cases IOs should 

enter a motion requesting the ALJ to retain the MMC(s) during the continuance or 

adjournment. See CDOA 2638 (PASQUARELLA). 

When an individual has initiated the process of cure, but has not completely satisfied 

the specific requirements outlined in CDOA 2535 (SWEENEY) , 2634 

(BARRETTA), and 2638 (PASQUARELLA) the ALJ may enter a finding of proved 

and an order of revocation, but stay this order to allow the individual to complete 

cure. In accordance with 46 CFR 5.707(a), persons who’s MMC(s) have been 

revoked as a result of dangerous drug use are not entitled to temporary MMC(s) 

while the revocation is being appealed. Similarly, persons who are seeking a 

continuance of a hearing in order to complete cure shall not be entitled to the use of 

their MMC(s) during the continuance and their MMC(s) shall be deposited with the 

Coast Guard until they have met the cure requirements. This was first addressed in 

Commandant Decision on Review #18 (CLAY). In that case, the Commandant 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 4: SUSPENSION AND REVOCATION 

C4-68 

F.17. MOTION TO 

DISMISS

F.18. RESPONDENT 

ACTIONS. 

F.19. REBUTTAL. 

held that once a prima facie case of illegal drug use is established to the satisfaction of 

the ALJ, the mariner poses a danger to public safety such that sufficient cause exists 

to withhold the license or document until cure is complete. This decision 

recognized clearly that once it is proved that the mariner used an illegal drug, the 

license or document must be revoked, or, in the alternative, the license or document 

must be withheld until the respondent proves that he or she is cured. This position 

was also stated in CDOA 2638 (PASQUARELLA), which stated “To be clear on 

this issue, an ALJ cannot direct the return of a mariner’s credentials until the mariner 

has obtained an MRO determination in accordance with 46 CFR 16.201(f) and both 

steps of the SWEENEY and CLAY cure process have been satisfied.” OCMI's 

shall immediately advise Commandant (CG-5451) of any request for issuance of 

temporary MMC(s) or return of MMC(s) during a continuance that does not 

conform to this policy. 

IOs present evidence first, and then rests their case. At the conclusion of the Coast 

Guard's presentation, the respondent may move to have any or all of the offenses 

from the complaint and factual allegations dismissed on the grounds that the 

evidence fails to establish a prima facie case against the respondent. This motion 

may be made orally during the hearing, or in writing. Usually, this argument is a 

summation of all of the evidence submitted by the Coast Guard with the conclusion 

that the evidence is insufficient to prove the offenses and factual allegations; IOs 

may submit an oral or written rebuttal of this claim. The ALJ may deny or grant any 

or all such motions, or may reserve a decision until the defense has completed its 

case. In deciding on the motion, the ALJ will determine if there is any substantive 

evidence that properly and reasonably establishes all essential elements of the 

offense or factual allegation in question. If substantive evidence of the offense or 

factual allegation exists, the motion will be denied. 

The respondent's case is presented in the same manner as the Coast Guard's except 

that the examination roles are reversed (the Coast Guard has the right of crossexamination). When an attorney represents the respondent, the ALJ will usually 

refrain from direct involvement in the presentation of the defense. In those cases 

where a respondent represents himself/herself, or is represented by someone who is 

not an attorney, the ALJ may interject during the hearing to ensure that all relevant 

facts within the witness' knowledge are presented. When the testimony of the last 

defense witness is completed, the ALJ will ask the respondent if he/she "rests"; if 

the answer is affirmative, no further testimony will be taken for the respondent. A 

list of common objections and a brief description of each can be found at the end of 

this chapter. (See Figure C4-5: Common Witness Objections.) 

When the defense has rested, the ALJ will afford the Coast Guard an opportunity to 

present evidence to rebut the defense testimony. IOs should make full use of the 

rebuttal process to further strengthen the case or impeach the testimony of 

witnesses, including the respondent's. Care should be taken that this presentation is 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 4: SUSPENSION AND REVOCATION 

C4-69 

F.20. CLOSING 

ARGUMENTS

After all evidence has been presented, the parties may present oral or written 

argument in the following order: 

1. Opening summation by the Coast Guard;

2. Argument by the respondent or the respondent's counsel; and 

F.21. ARGUMENTS 

IN MITIGATION OR 

AGGRAVATION

IOs may enter the mariner's prior disciplinary record in argument of mitigation or 

aggravation of the sanction. In addition to obtaining a mariner's MERMARPER, 

IOs should also verify the mariner's S&R and civil penalty history in MISLE. IOs 

may also include a recommended order to the ALJ. The recommendation can be 

amplified by calling particulars of past offenses to the attention of the ALJ. For 

example, a finding of "Proved" in an assault and battery case may be argued to be 

aggravated because of the mariner's prior record of assault and battery, which

demonstrates a tendency for repeated violence. IOs may also offer evidence of 

other matters in aggravation such as a pilot's disciplinary record with a state pilot 

commission. In accordance with 33 CFR 20.1315, IOs may also enter as part of the 

mariner’s prior record, information concerning the following: 

• Any written warning issued by the Coast Guard and accepted by the 

respondent; 

• Final agency action by the Coast Guard on any S&R proceeding in which a 

sanction or consent order was entered;

• Any agreement for voluntary surrender entered into by the respondent; 

• Any final judgments of convictions in State or Federal courts; 

• Final agency action resulting in civil penalty or warning being imposed 

against the respondent in proceedings administered by the Coast Guard 

under 33 CFR 1.07; and 

• Any official commendatory information concerning the respondent of which 

the Coast Guard is aware. 

F.22. PROPOSED 

FINDINGS

Proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law may be filed with the ALJ who will 

establish a schedule for filing at the conclusion of the hearing. This is an optional 

filing. Failure to comply within this time will be regarded as a waiver of this optional 

filing. 

F.23. ORAL 

truly rebuttal evidence, not a reopening of the Coast Guard's case. 

3. Closing argument by the Coast Guard. 

The respondent may offer evidence of, and argument on, prior maritime service, 

including both the record introduced by IOs and any commendatory evidence. The 

respondent may offer evidence and argument in mitigation of any charge proved, 

and IOs may offer evidence to rebut the respondent’s evidence and argument. 

If both sides waive proposed findings and the case is simple, the ALJ may issue an 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 4: SUSPENSION AND REVOCATION 

C4-70 

DECISIONS

F.24. DECISION &

ORDER

If the allegations are... 

Proved Can order any of the following: 

3⁄4 an admonition (setting forth the offense(s) 

for which the Respondent is admonished) 

3⁄4 outright suspension 

3⁄4 suspension on probation 

3⁄4 combination of both 

3⁄4 stayed revocation 

Proved and are in violation of a 

previously-ordered period of 

probation 

Proved and concerns cases of 

negligence 

Proved and the ALJ determines 

that the respondent is 

professionally incompetent in the 

grade of the license, or certificate 

he or she holds, but is considered 

competent in a lower grade 

Not proved 

F.25. ORDERS In the event an order is tailored to include a specific period of probation, the 

order from the bench. The order is in writing but the findings of fact, conclusions, 

and reasons are oral. If parties wish a copy, they will be transcribed by the ALJ’s 

office. 

The order will normally apply to all licenses, certificates, and/or documents, except 

that in cases of negligence or professional incompetence, the order may be directed 

against specific licenses or documents in qualified ratings. The period of suspension 

should be described in terms of specified time periods, not specific dates. See 46 

CFR 5.567(c) and (e). An order of revocation or outright suspension must direct the 

respondent to surrender his/her license, certificate and/or document immediately 

upon service of the order to the Coast Guard. See 46 CFR 5.567(d). Failure to 

comply may subject the respondent to penalties prescribed by 18 USC 2197. In 

cases involving special circumstances, the surrender may be ordered on a certain 

date. See 46 CFR 5.567(d). Note: ALJs have the authority to tailor an order 

appropriately in cases involving seasonal activity. See CDOA 1793 (FARIA), 1883 

(TREVOR), 1887 (VIGILANT), and 2475 (BOURDO). The following table lists 

the possible outcomes and orders. 

Then the ALJ... 

3⁄4 revocation 

Issues the order, noting that the previously 

ordered probation is revoked, and the sanction 

remitted on such probation is in force and 

represents a part of the sanction ordered in the 

instant case. See CDOA 2481 (CROWLEY) 

May issue an order directed against specific 

licenses or documents in qualified ratings. See 

46 CFR 5.567(b) 

May issue an order revoking the current license, 

or certificate and ordering the issuance of one 

in a lower grade 

Must issue an order of dismissal 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 4: SUSPENSION AND REVOCATION 

C4-71 

INCLUDING A 

SPECIFIC 

PROBATIONARY 

PERIOD. 

respondent should be admonished: 

If... Then... 

You violate the terms 

of this probation 

The Coast Guard 

may bring a 

suspension and 

revocation 

proceeding against 

you 

Another suspension 

and revocation 

proceeding is proved 

for violations during 

the period of 

probation 

The Coast Guard will 

request that the 

probationary 

suspension be 

enforced 

G.1. REVIEWING 

THE CASE

G.2. COMPLETED 

CASE FILE

When final personnel action has been completed, IOs shall review the case file and 

remove unnecessary material, such as notes or reminders, intraoffice notes 

expressing unsubstantiated opinions, and the like. The requirements of the 

Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), Privacy Act, and the regulations promulgated 

there under should be considered in reviewing the file. After receipt of a request for 

release of a file, it is highly improper to remove any part of it (see Volume I of this 

manual). The official record of all S&R proceedings is maintained at the ALJ 

Docketing Center. The unit copy of the case file shall be maintained in accordance 

with the Information and Life Cycle Management Manual, COMDTINST M5212.A 

(series). 

G.3. NOTIFYING NMC shall be notified following the below procedures when personnel action 

And ... 

The suspended period of 

suspension may be put in force. 

The minimum period of 

suspension that can be ordered is 

[period of probationary 

suspension]. The actual period will 

likely be higher. 

G. POST-HEARING PROCEDURES. 

IOs should carefully review the case to see if any information should be forwarded 

to other units for action, e.g. District program managers should be sent all 

information pertaining to activities under their control (e.g., cases involving damage 

to aids to navigation should be brought to the attention of the District aids to 

navigation branch). IOs shall maintain close liaison with ALJs’s staffs to assist, as 

necessary, in assuring that D&O's are served and that orders for outright suspension 

or revocation are complied with. If attempts for service and/or, when applicable, 

surrender is unsuccessful; IOs shall add the mariner to the MISLE Wanted List. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 4: SUSPENSION AND REVOCATION 

C4-72 

NMC OF PERSONNEL 

ACTIONS

results in any of the following sanctions: 

• Letter of warning has been issued and accepted; 

• MMC has been suspended; 

• MMC has been revoked; 

• Mariner has voluntarily surrendered MMC; or 

• Mariner has voluntarily deposited MMC. 

IOs shall notify NMC via the notify NMC function in the MISLE Enforcement 

Activity. The following information will automatically be included in the 

notification: 

Subject line: PERSONNEL ACTION: LAST NAME, FIRST NAME, MIDDLE 

NAME, SSN 

Text of email: 

IDENTIFICATION: 

1) Merchant Mariner's License and/or MMD Number 

2) Merchant Mariner's MMLD Reference Number (ref number is found when you 

access the Party File via MMLD in MISLE) 

ACTIVITY NUMBER: MISLE enforcement activity # 

REASON FOR NOTIFICATION: Select “Sanction Imposed” on the options 

window after selecting the “Notify NMC” button within the MISLE Enforcement 

Activity and amend the standard text, if necessary, to clearly convey the applicable 

information to NMC. 

• Sanction Imposed. Standard text: A sanction of [warning, deposit, 

surrender, suspension, or revocation (mapped from the imposed sanction 

tab)] has been imposed against subject mariner’s [MMC info, mapped from 

Party ID tab]. 

It is imperative for NMC to receive this data promptly to prevent the possible 

issuance of duplicate MMCs. When any mariner's MMCs is suspended, surrendered 

or revoked for any reason and not delivered into Coast Guard custody, this fact 

should also appear in the notification as well as a statement as to the disposition of 

the MMC (i.e., MMC destroyed or clearly defaced as void/invalid). 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 4: SUSPENSION AND REVOCATION 

C4-73 

G.4. DEPOSIT OF 

MMCS AFTER 

SUSPENSION

When an ALJ issues an order that the MMC(s) are to be suspending for a period of 

time, the MMC(s) shall be deposited with the cognizant OCMI. A receipt shall be 

issued to the mariner and the MMCs retained locally. The MMCs should be 

returned upon expiration of the suspension period by being picked up in person or 

by being sent by certified mail, return receipt requested, to the mariner or to 

someone so designated by the mariner in writing. IOs shall notify NMC via the 

notify NMC function in the MISLE Enforcement Activity that the MMC has been 

returned. Select “Sanction Satisfied” on the options window after selecting the 

“Notify NMC” button within the MISLE Enforcement Activity and amend the 

standard text, if necessary, to clearly convey the applicable information to NMC. 

• Sanction Satisfied. Standard text: Subject mariner has satisfied the imposed

sanction and their MMC was returned, please unlock mariner’s record. 

G.5. DISPOSITION 

OF MMCS AFTER 

REVOCATION

G.6. REOPENING A 

HEARING

G.6.a. Added Evidence. 

However, it is contrary to the policy of the Commandant to return MMD's to 

seamen outside of the United States. This policy was initiated to prevent MMD's 

from falling into unauthorized hands. [NOTE: Mariners may be shipped as 

replacements at foreign ports without MMD's]. Any request for the return of 

MMD's to a foreign address shall be denied. Mariners claiming that their MMCs 

have been lost may apply for duplicates during the suspension period but duplicates 

shall not be issued until the suspension expires. The suspension period shall not 

start until duplicate MMC requests are filed with the appropriate REC. For mariners 

choosing not to apply for duplicate MMCs, a lost MMC affidavit shall be required in 

a form similar to Figure C4-2. The affidavit is to be signed in the presence of an IO 

or notarized. The original shall be scanned an attached to the MISLE enforcement 

activity as correspondence. 

When an ALJ issues an order of revocation, the MMC(s) shall be surrendered to the 

cognizant OCMI. If the MMC(s) is not surrendered, IOs shall add the mariner to 

the MISLE Wanted List. Revoked MMCs should be held pending any appeal that 

may be made. If no appeal is made or, if an appeal made is unsuccessful, revoked 

MMCs shall be destroyed or for cases involving possible criminal charges for 

forgery, the MMC shall be clearly defaced as void/invalid and maintained in the case 

file. If the mariner claims that his or her revoked MMCs were previously lost, 

he/she shall be required to file a lost MMC affidavit in a form similar to Figure C4-

2. The affidavit is to be signed in the presence of an IO or notarized. The original 

shall be scanned an attached to the MISLE enforcement activity as correspondence. 

33 CFR 20.904(a) allows the ALJ to reopen the record if it is believed that any 

change in fact or law warrants it, or that in the public’s interest the record should be 

reopened to take added evidence. Any party may move to reopen the record within 

30 from the closing of the record. The motion to reopen must clearly state the facts 

and the grounds for the reopening request. If the respondent files a motion to 

reopen, IOs, if opposing the motion, must file a response, failure to do so will waive 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 4: SUSPENSION AND REVOCATION 

C4-74 

G.6.b. Setting Aside Conviction 

33 CFR 20.904(e)(1) provides that the respondent may at any time file a petition to 

reopen the record for the ALJ to rescind any order suspending or revoking a 

MMC(s) if the order was the result of a conviction for: 

• A violation of a dangerous-drug law; 

• A violation of an offense that would prevent the issuance or renewal of the 

license, certificate, or document; or 

• A violation of an offense described in subparagraph 205(a)(3)(A) or (B) of 

the National Driver Register Act of 1982 (49 USC 30304). 

G.6.c. Proof of Cure After Revocation Due to Drug Use 

H.1. INTRODUCTION

H.2. REGULATIONS Regulations concerning appeals can be found at: 

• Appeals; 46 CFR Subpart J (5.701 – 5.715) 

• Appeals; 33 CFR Subpart J (20.1001 – 20.1004) 

H.3. WHEN AND 

WHERE TO FILE AN 

APPEAL. 

Notices of appeal and briefs are filed at the ALJ Docketing Center. A party can file 

after the ALJ issues the decision and order in the case. The notice must be filed 

within 30 days of service of the decision. 

H.4. WHAT CAN BE Parties can appeal the following issues: 

the objection. 

The respondent must submit a specific order of the court that states the conviction 

has been unconditionally set-aside for all purposes. However, the ALJ may not 

rescind the order on account of any law that provides for a subsequent conditional 

setting-aside, modification, or expunging of the order of the court, by way of

granting clemency or any other relief after the conviction has become final, whether 

or not punishment was imposed. 

33 CFR 20.904(f) provides that the respondent may file a motion with the 

Docketing Center within three years of the hearing to have the hearing reopened to 

modify an order of revocation. This affords the respondent an alternative method 

to seek authorization to be issued a new MMC following the provisions of Title 46, 

Code of Federal Regulations, Part 5, Subpart L (5.901-5.905), and may be used in 

lieu of the Part 5 process (see Chapter C5 for additional guidance). 

H. APPEAL PROCESS

The Coast Guard as well as the respondent has a right of appeal. IOs can also file a 

brief when respondent appeals an ALJ decision. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 4: SUSPENSION AND REVOCATION 

C4-75 

APPEALED • Whether each finding of fact is supported by substantial evidence. 

• Whether each conclusion of law accords with applicable law, precedent, and 

public policy. 

• Whether the ALJ abused his or her discretion. 

• The ALJ's denial of a motion for disqualification. 

H.5. STEPS TO 

FILING AN APPEAL. The following table lists the steps to filing an appeal: 

Step 

1 

2 

3 Prepare your brief. The brief must detail the: 

(i) basis for the appeal; 

(ii) reasons supporting the appeal; and

(iii) relief requested in the appeal. 

4 

5 

H.6. THE 

APPELLATE PROCESS. The following table lists the major stages in the appellate process: 

Stage 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

Action 

File a notice of appeal within 30 days of issuance of decision. 

Request a transcript from the ALJ Docketing Center. 

When you rely on material contained in the record for the appeal, the 

appellate brief must specifically refer to the pertinent parts of the record. 

File your brief with the Docketing Center within 60 days of issuance of 

decision. If you cannot make the deadline, request an extension. 

Review the reply brief. If necessary, request leave to file an additional 

brief. 

Description 

Notice—must be filed within 30 days of decision. 

Preparation Stage—review transcript and decision and write appellate 

brief. 

Appellate Brief—must be filed within 60 days of decision. 

Reply Brief—must be filed within 35 days of appellate brief. 

Appellate record is forwarded from Docketing Center to Commandant 

(CG-0941). 

CG-0941 prepares appeal decision for Commandant or Vice Commandant

Commandant or Vice Commandant review and approval. 

Service of appeal decision. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 4: SUSPENSION AND REVOCATION 

C4-76 

9 

H.7. APPEAL TO 

THE NTSB 

H.8. APPEAL TO 

THE FEDERAL COURT

H.9. STAY OF 

DECISION AND ORDER 

OF ALJ DURING 

APPEAL TO 

COMMANDANT

Appeal to NTSB—must be filed within 10 days of service of 

Commandant’s decision. 

The provisions in 49 CFR 825 allow appeals to the National Transportation Safety 

Board (NTSB) of decisions of the Commandant to sustain orders of suspension, 

revocation, or denial of Temporary MMCs. A stay of the suspension or revocation 

order may be granted when the mariner is otherwise eligible for temporary 

documents while the mariner appeals his/her case to the NTSB (see 46 CFR 5. 715). 

This permits the mariner to continue service while the appeal is pending (the same 

as when an appeal to the Commandant is pending). 

The appellant may further seek relief from an adverse decision in the federal court. 

When a mariner files suit in federal court seeking to have an adverse decision 

overturned, the servicing District legal division, Commandant (CG-5451) and 

(CG­0945) shall be immediately notified. Generally, mariners are required to 

exhaust all administrative remedies (that is, appeal to the Commandant and the 

NTSB) prior to filing such suits. The Coast Guard is bound by the decision of the 

court in such a case. 

Subject to the provisions of 46 CFR 5.707, temporary MMCs may be authorized 

while a mariner is appealing a decision to the Commandant. Temporary MMCs shall 

not be authorized when the order of revocation resulted from a complaint issued for 

an offense enumerated in 46 CFR 5.59. The request shall be made in writing and 

submitted to the ALJ who heard the case. If the transcript of the hearing record has 

been forwarded to the Commandant, the request shall be forwarded to 

Commandant (CG-5451). If the ALJ denies the request, the individual may appeal, 

within 30 days of the ALJ’s notification of the denial, to Commandant (CG-5451). 

The Coast Guard official (ALJ or CG-5451) taking action on the request must take 

into consideration whether the service of the individual is compatible with the 

requirements for safety at sea and consistent with applicable laws. Depending on 

the circumstances, the individual, for safety reasons, may only be permitted to serve 

in a lesser capacity than their regular license would otherwise authorize. The 

temporary license is distinct from the regular license. [See CDOA 2483 

(TOMBARI)]. After authorization by the ALJ or the Commandant, temporary 

MMCs may be issued by the National Maritime Center (NMC) and the individual 

must meet any additional requirements deemed necessary by the NMC. Temporary 

MMCs are valid for a period not to exceed 6 months. Where the appeal process 

exceeds this period, the mariner may request renewal of any temporary MMCs by 

filing a request for extension with the Commandant (CG-5451). When granted, the 

expired MMCs shall be surrendered and a replacement issued for the period 

authorized. At the time of issuance, the previously issued MMCs shall be 

surrendered to the issuing REC or NMC and forwarded to Commandant (CG-0941) 

for inclusion in the appeal file. A temporary MMD shall be issued in the format 

shown in Figure C4-3. To allow the mariner to post the license in a conspicuous 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 4: SUSPENSION AND REVOCATION 

C4-77 

H.10. STAY OF 

DECISION ON APPEAL 

OF COMMANDANT 

DURING APPEAL TO 

THE NTSB 

H.11. SERVICE OF 

SANCTION WHILE ON 

APPEAL. 

place, as required by 46 USC 7110, the temporary license is issued on Form CG2849, License to U.S. Merchant Marine Officer. The face of the license is 

completed in the same manner as is an original, and is signed and dated by the 

OCMI or the OCMI's representative, with the following modification to be placed 

above the signature block: "Temporary License issued under 46 CFR 5.707, to 

expire six months from date of issue. This License replaces License Number 

123456 issued at (PORT) on (DATE)." If the final decision on the appeal upholds 

the original order to suspend or revoke the mariner's MMCs, all temporary MMCs 

must be surrendered immediately. If the original MMC will expire in less than 6 

months, the validity of the temporary MMC is limited accordingly. If the 

Commandant authorizes issuance or renewal of a temporary MMC but the original 

has expired, the licensee shall apply for renewal of the original MMC before the 

temporary MMC is issued.

Subject to the provisions of 46 CFR 5.715, temporary MMCs may be authorized by 

the Commandant while a mariner is appealing a decision to the NTSB. Temporary 

licenses shall be issued as described above, and temporary MMD shall be issued in 

the format shown in Figure C4-4. The temporary MMCs shall be valid for a 

maximum of 6 months (or until a decision has been reached). If review has not 

been completed and an order not served by the NTSB within 6 months, the 

temporary MMCs may be renewed as described above. At the time of issuance, the 

previously issued MMCs shall be surrendered to the issuing REC or NMC and 

forwarded to Commandant (CG-0941) for inclusion in the appeal file. 

A mariner who has surrendered his/her MMC to the cognizant OCMI, and then 

appeals a decision of an ALJ to the Commandant or a decision of the Commandant 

to the NTSB, immediately begins serving the imposed sanction provided he/she has 

not requested a stay of the ALJ’s decision. If a stay is granted and the issuance of a 

temporary MMC is authorized, the mariner does not begin serving his/her sanction 

until all appeals are exhausted and, if issued, the temporary MMC is surrendered to 

the issuing OCMI. See NTSB decision EM-134 (SIMMONS). 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT 

PART C: ENFORCEMENT 

CHAPTER 4: SUSPENSION AND REVOCATION 

FIGURE C4-1: Notice of Suspension/Revocation 

Commanding Officer Building 14, Coast Guard Island 

United States Coast Guard Alameda, CA 94501-5100 

Sector San Francisco Bay Phone: (510) 437-3149 

FAX: (510) 437-3072 

Email: 

16722 

January 22, 200X 

Mr. Joe Somebody 

57 High Street 

Oakland, CA 94501 

Subject: NOTICE OF SUSPENSION [REVOCATION] OF YOUR COAST ISSUED MERCHANT 

MARINER’S CREDENTIAL 

Dear Mr. Somebody: 

This notice is to inform you that by order dated [date of D&O] of the U.S. Coast Guard Administrative 

Law Judge at Alameda, CA, your [Merchant Mariner’s Document / Coast Guard License / Certificate of 

Registry] Number [########] was [revoked / suspended for XX months]. You are therefore precluded 

from operating under the authority of said credential. The Judge’s order is being sent to this office and 

will be delivered to you upon receipt. You are also cautioned that continued service under the above 

credential may be considered a violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 2197, a crime 

punishable by fine or imprisonment for not more than five years, or both. 

Sincerely, 

NAME 

Rank, U.S. Coast Guard 

Position 

By direction 

C4-78 
_____________________ 

_____________________ 

_____________________ 

______________________________________________________________________________ 

______________________________________________________________________________ 

______________________________________________________________________________ 

______________________________________________________________________________ 

______________________________________________________________________________ 

__________________________________________ 

______________ 

USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT 

PART C: ENFORCEMENT 

CHAPTER 4: SUSPENSION AND REVOCATION 

FIGURE C4-2: Lost Credential Affidavit 

LOST CREDENTIAL AFFIDAVIT 

1. I, _______________________, hereby notify the U.S. Coast Guard that I have lost the 

following listed Coast Guard issued Merchant Mariner’s Credentials: 

2. Circumstances concerning the loss, to the best of my knowledge, and my attempts to find the 

missing MMCs are as follows:__________________________________________________ 

I further certify that if this (these), or any other Coast Guard issued MMCs are located, it (they) will 

promptly surrendered as directed by the order of the Administrative Law Judge issued 

____________________. 

Dated 

 ___________________________Print name 

___________________________Signature 

C4-79 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT 

PART C: ENFORCEMENT 

CHAPTER 4: SUSPENSION AND REVOCATION 

FIGURE C4-3: Temporary Merchant Mariner’s Document in accordance with 46 CFR 5.707 

United States Coast Guard Temporary Merchant Mariner’s Document 

Office: __________________, Place: ____________, Date: ________ 

(Mariner’s Name), the holder of MMD (MMD Number), having filed a written request with the 

Administrative Law Judge (ALJ), on (date), for the issuance of a Temporary MMD as a substitute for the 

document which the applicant held prior to the date of an order entered by a Coast Guard ALJ, on (date), 

the said applicant is hereby granted this Temporary MMD in accordance with Title 46, Code of Federal 

Regulations, 5.707. This Temporary MMD is considered identical in type and character to the applicant’s 

permanent document. This Temporary MMD is issued to be effective for a period of 6 months from the 

date of issuance hereof, and it will expire on (date) or upon service of the Commandant’s decision on the 

applicant’s appeal, whichever occurs first. If this MMD expires before the Commandant’s decision is 

rendered, it may be renewed upon request to any Coast Guard Officer in Charge, Marine Inspection. 

WARNING: Title 18, Unites States Code, 2197 provides for severe monetary penalties and 

imprisonment of persons for unlawful use of this MMD. Use beyond its expiration date may subject the 

holder of this document to the penalties of the above statute and, in addition the holder may be subject to 

being issued a complaint for misconduct under the provisions of Title 46, U.S.C., Chapter 77. Upon 

expiration of this MMD, it shall be forthwith surrendered to the United States Coast Guard. 

IDENTIFICATION 

Merchant Mariner’s Document 

Merchant Mariner’s Document 

Issued at: ______________________ 

 On: __________________ 

 Endorsed as: 

Born: ____________________ Height: _____________ 

Place: ____________________ Weight: _____________ 

Citizenship: _______________ Color Hair: __________ 

Social Security #: ___________ Color Eyes: __________ 

Address: 

_________________ ____________________ 

Signature of Seaman Issued By (Title) 

THE ISSUANCE OF THIS MMD DEFERS THE RUNNING OF THE SUSPENSION/REVOCATION PERIOD 

ORDERED, UNTIL SUCH TIME AS THIS DOCUMENT IS SURRENDERED TO THE U. S. COAST GUARD. 

C4-80 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT 

PART C: ENFORCEMENT 

CHAPTER 4: SUSPENSION AND REVOCATION 

FIGURE C4-4: Temporary Merchant Mariner’s Document in accordance with 46 CFR 5.715 

United States Coast Guard Temporary Merchant Mariner’s Document 

Office: __________________, Place: ____________, Date: ________ 

(Mariner’s Name), the holder of MMD (MMD Number), having filed a written request with the 

Commandant, U.S. Coast Guard, on (date), for the issuance of a Temporary MMD as a substitute for the 

document which the applicant held prior to the date of an order affirmed by the Commandant, on (date), 

the said applicant is hereby granted this Temporary MMD in accordance with Title 46, Code of Federal 

Regulations, 5.715. This Temporary MMD is considered identical in type and character to the applicant’s 

permanent document. This Temporary MMD is issued to be effective for a period of 6 months from the 

date of issuance hereof, and it will expire on (date) or upon service of the National Transportation Safety 

Board’s (NTSB) decision on the applicant’s appeal, whichever occurs first. If this MMD expires before 

the NTSB’s decision is rendered, it may be renewed upon request to any Coast Guard Officer in Charge, 

Marine Inspection. 

WARNING: Title 18, Unites States Code, 2197 provides for severe monetary penalties and 

imprisonment of persons for unlawful use of this MMD. Use beyond its expiration date may subject the 

holder of this document to the penalties of the above statute and, in addition the holder may be subject to 

being issued a complaint for misconduct under the provisions of Title 46, U.S.C., Chapter 77. Upon 

expiration of this MMD, it shall be forthwith surrendered to the United States Coast Guard. 

IDENTIFICATION 

Merchant Mariner’s Document 

Merchant Mariner’s Document 

Issued at: ______________________ 

 On: __________________ 

 Endorsed as: 

Born: ____________________ Height: _____________ 

Place: ____________________ Weight: _____________ 

Citizenship: _______________ Color Hair: __________ 

Social Security #: ___________ Color Eyes: __________ 

Address: 

_________________ ____________________ 

Signature of Seaman Issued By (Title) 

THE ISSUANCE OF THIS MMD DEFERS THE RUNNING OF THE SUSPENSION/REVOCATION PERIOD 

ORDERED, UNTIL SUCH TIME AS THIS DOCUMENT IS SURRENDERED TO THE U. S. COAST GUARD. 

C4-81 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT 

PART C: ENFORCEMENT 

CHAPTER 4: SUSPENSION AND REVOCATION 

FIGURE C4-5: Common Witness Objections (see: Trial Objections Handbook for more information) 

Ambiguous - If you do not understand the question being posed to the witness. 

Argumentative - A questioner may never argue with a witness. 

Asked and Answered - If a question has been asked and answered already (i.e. the question is 

being repeated to emphasize a fact), it may not be asked again. 

Assumes Facts not in Evidence - A question should not be based on assumptions that have not 

been taken into the record. 

Beyond Scope of Testimony - Technically you may not cross-examine or redirect a witness on 

subjects not brought out in their testimony. However the ALJ has wide discretion to allow this if 

the goal is to impeach the witness.

Calls for Conclusion - Question calls for the witness to express and opinion. 

Compound Question - Compound questions are two questions asked simultaneously. 

Witnesses should be asked single, simple questions. 

Hearsay - Hearsay evidence under 33 CFR 20.803 is admissible; however the ALJ may consider 

the fact that the evidence is hearsay when determining its weight. 

Immaterial - The question must bear on the subject of the hearing. 

Irrelevant - The question must bear on a subject in dispute. If the other party agrees with you 

on a certain issue, then any further questions on that issue are not relevant. (Relevancy and 

materiality appear similar but are distinct). 

Calls for Narrative - The question must lead to a direct answer. 

Opinion - The question calls for an opinion. 

Non- Responsive - The witness must answer only the question posed, not volunteer additional 

information. 

Lacks Personal Knowledge - Question calls for witness to answer on subjects beyond their 

personal knowledge. 

Leading Question - Generally, leading questions may not be asked during direct examination. 

Speculative - The question calls for the witness to speculate or guess. 

C4-82 
USCG Marine Safety Manual 

Volume V: Investigations and Enforcement

PART C: ENFORCEMENT 

Chapter Five: 

Administrative Clemency
 

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 5: ADMINISTRATIVE CLEMENCY 

C5-i 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

A. ADMINISTRATIVE CLEMENCY ...................... 1

A.1. GENERAL .........................................................................................................................................................................1

A.2. APPLICANT’S RESPONSIBILITY.........................................................................................................................................1

A.3. ADMINISTRATIVE CLEMENCY CHECKLIST .......................................................................................................................1

A.4. IO’S RESPONSIBILITY.......................................................................................................................................................1

A.4.a. Initial Contact by the Applicant................................................................................................................................1

A.4.b. Requests Going to the ACRB....................................................................................................................................2

A.4.c. Requests Going to the Coast Guard Docketing Center ............................................................................................2

A.5. TO WHOM IS ADMINISTRATIVE CLEMENCY REQUESTED .................................................................................................2

A.5.a. When the clemency request goes to the ALJ Docketing Center................................................................................2

A.5.b. When the clemency request goes to the ACRB .........................................................................................................2

A.6. OFFICER IN CHARGE, MARINE INSPECTION (OCMI) RECOMMENDATION ........................................................................3

A.7. RESPONSE TO MOTION TO REOPEN....................................................................................................................................3

A.7.a. Appeals by the Coast Guard.....................................................................................................................................3

A.8. ADMINISTRATIVE CLEMENCY DATA ENTRY ....................................................................................................................4

A.9. CLEMENCY PROCESS AFTER A DECISION IS RENDERED ...................................................................................................4

B. SUBMITTING A CLEMENCY APPLICATION PACKAGE ....... 4

B.1. REQUIRED FORMAT..........................................................................................................................................................4

B.2. INVESTIGATING OFFICER TO CONTACT REFERENCES .......................................................................................................5

B.3. MINIMUM CONTENTS .......................................................................................................................................................5

B.4. TIME LIMITS.....................................................................................................................................................................5

B.5. WAIVERS..........................................................................................................................................................................5

B.5.a. Good Character........................................................................................................................................................5

B.5.b. Misconduct, Conviction for Wrongful Simple Possession or Drug Use ...................................................................6

B.5.c. Alcohol Use, or Related to Alcohol, e.g. NDRA violations.......................................................................................6

B.6. APPLICANT’S LETTER.......................................................................................................................................................7

B.7. APPLICANT’S LETTER(S) OF EMPLOYMENT ......................................................................................................................7

B.8. APPLICANT’S LETTER(S) OF REFERENCE..........................................................................................................................7

B.9. PROOF OF CURE OR REHABILITATION ..............................................................................................................................7

B.9.a. Proof of Cure in Drug USE Cases............................................................................................................................8

B.9.b. Proof of Cure in Conviction of a dangerous drug law Cases...................................................................................8

B.9.c. Proof of Cure in Alcohol-related Offense Cases ......................................................................................................9

B.9.d. Proof of Rehabilitation in Misconduct, Negligence, and Violation of Law/Reg Cases............................................9

B.9.e. Proof of Cure in Physical or Mental Incompetence Cases.......................................................................................9

B.10. CRIMINAL RECORDS AND DRIVING RECORDS ................................................................................................................9

B.10.a. Criminal Records .................................................................................................................................................10

B.10.b. Driving Records ...................................................................................................................................................11

B.10.c. OCMI Discretion ..................................................................................................................................................11

B.11. APPLICATION FOR NEW LICENSE OR DOCUMENT .........................................................................................................12

C. ADMINISTRATIVE CLEMENCY REVIEW BOARD .......... 12

C.1. GENERAL........................................................................................................................................................................12

C.2. RECOMMENDATION OF THE ACRB ................................................................................................................................12

C.3. FINAL AGENCY ACTION REGARDING ADMINISTRATIVE CLEMENCY REQUESTS .............................................................12

C.4. NOTIFYING THE CLEMENCY APPLICANT .........................................................................................................................12

C.5. RESUBMISSION OF APPLICATION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE CLEMENCY ..............................................................................13

C.6. REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION OF DECISIONS REGARDING ADMINISTRATIVE CLEMENCY ........................................13 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 5: ADMINISTRATIVE CLEMENCY 

C5-ii 

FIGURE C5-1: ADMINISTRATIVE CLEMENCY CHECKLIST ....................................................................................................14

FIGURE C5-2: ADMINISTRATIVE CLEMENCY COVER SHEETS..............................................................................................15 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 5: ADMINISTRATIVE CLEMENCY 

C5-1 

A.1. GENERAL

46 USC 7701(c) 

46 CFR 5.901 - 5.905 

46 CFR 10.223

46 CFR 12.02-21

Merchant mariners whose Merchant Mariner Credential(s) (MMC) have been revoked 

or have voluntarily surrendered such MMC(s) must seek authorization to be issued a 

new MMC following the provisions of Title 46, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 5, 

Subpart L (5.901-5.905), or 33 CFR 20.904(f). These regulatory provisions for 

mariners to seek authorization to be issued a new MMC are commonly referred to as 

the administrative clemency process. See Section A.5. below for further guidance on 

the applicability of each process. Administrative clemency is a voluntary process for 

merchant mariners. As such, the mariner has specific tasks that must be completed 

to ensure a favorable decision. The administrative clemency process resides solely 

under the discretion of the Office of Investigation and Casualty Analysis, 

Commandant (CG-545). The information contained within this chapter will aid the 

Officer in Charge, Marine Inspection (OCMI) in determining if the applicant: 

• meets the intent of the regulations; 

• is eligible for a waiver of the time limitations; and 

A.2. APPLICANT’S 

RESPONSIBILITY

A.3.

ADMINISTRATIVE 

CLEMENCY CHECKLIST

A.4. IO’S 

RESPONSIBILITY

A.4.a. Initial Contact by the Applicant 

A. ADMINISTRATIVE CLEMENCY

• has met the Administrative Clemency Review Board’s (ACRB) definition of 

rehabilitation and/or non-association for drug or alcohol-related offenses 

It is the applicant’s responsibility to provide the necessary documentation for 

administrative clemency regardless of the clemency process that applies. When a 

mariner contacts the Coast Guard, the OCMI shall review the clemency processes 

and documentation requirements with the mariner and provide the mariner with a 

copy of Figure C5-2, Administrative Clemency Cover Sheets, to assist the mariner in 

preparing a complete application package. For application packages going to the 

ACRB (see A.5. below for the distinction), the applicant has 60 days to submit a 

complete package starting with their first documentation submission. 

OCMIs shall use the Administrative Clemency Checklist (Figure C5-1) located at the 

end of this chapter to ensure mariner application packages are complete and shall 

attach a copy of the completed checklist as correspondence in the MISLE 

Administrative Clemency enforcement activity. OCMIs must ensure that 

administrative clemency applicants meet those minimum requirements prior to 

forwarding the application package for consideration. 

In general, acting as the OCMI representative, it is the IOs responsibility to provide a 

copy of the Administrative Clemency Cover Sheets (Figure C5-2) to every applicant 

(regardless of the clemency process that applies), review and verify the 

documentation submitted by the applicant, and submit a recommendation on behalf 

of the OCMI to the ACRB based upon the documentation provided and the time 

limitation requirements of 46 CFR 5.901. When the applicant contacts the IO, a 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT 

PART C: ENFORCEMENT 

CHAPTER 5: ADMINISTRATIVE CLEMENCY 

cursory interview should be conducted to determine whom the clemency request 

should be addressed to in accordance with A.5. below. 

A.5. TO WHOM IS 


ADMINISTRATIVE 


CLEMENCY REQUESTED 


A.4.b. Requests Going to the ACRB 


If the request should go to the ACRB in accordance with A.5. below, the IO should 

see if the individual meets the requirements set forth in 

46 USC 7701(c), 46 CFR 5.901 through 5.905, and this chapter. In order to reduce 

the number of resource hours spent on a clemency activity, the IO shall avoid 

accepting documentation from the applicant in a piecemeal fashion. Regardless, the 

applicant should be advised that he/she has 60 days to submit a complete package 

starting with their first documentation submittal. Upon conclusion of the 60 days the 

IO shall forward the package via the chain of command to the ACRB with a unit 

recommendation (see A.6. below). 

A.4.c. Requests Going to the Coast Guard Docketing 


Center 


If in accordance with A.5. below the clemency request (referred to as a motion to 

reopen under 33 CFR 20.904(f)) should be filed with the Coast Guard Docketing 

Center, the IO should provide the mariner with the Docketing Center’s contact 

information and direct the mariner there for further assistance on filing requirements. 

As stated in A.4.a. above, the IO is responsible for assisting the mariner in where to 

direct the administrative clemency application package. The application package will 

either be sent to the ACRB at the Office of Investigations and Casualty Analysis, 

Commandant (CG-545) by the IO or to the Coast Guard Docketing Center by the 

mariner depending upon which criteria below is met. 

A.5.a. When the clemency request goes to the ALJ 


Docketing Center 


A mariner who has had his/her Merchant Mariner’s Credential (MMC) revoked by an 

Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) within the previous 3 years, should be encouraged to 

file a motion to reopen the case with the Coast Guard Docketing Center in 

accordance with 33 CFR Part 20.904(f). The mariner must submit evidence that 

explains why the basis for revocation is no longer valid. The mariner shall be given a 

copy of the Administrative Clemency Cover Sheets (Figure C5-2) as guidance as to 

the Coast Guard’s position on what constitutes sufficient evidence of rehabilitation. 

The Coast Guard will submit a response to all motions to reopen in accordance with 

A.7. below. 

A.5.b. When the clemency request goes to the ACRB 


If three years have passed since the revocation of the MMC, or the mariner 

surrendered his/her MMC, the mariner must apply for Administrative Clemency 

from the Commandant following the procedures of this chapter. The OCMI has a 

C5-2 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT 

PART C: ENFORCEMENT 

CHAPTER 5: ADMINISTRATIVE CLEMENCY 

A.6. OFFICER IN 


CHARGE, MARINE 


INSPECTION 


(OCMI)


RECOMMENDATION


chance to make a recommendation for or against the granting of administrative 

clemency in accordance with A.6. below. 

As stated in A.4. above, prior to making a recommendation for or against 

administrative clemency, the IO shall verify all the documentation provided as well as 

the time limitation requirements of 46 CFR 5.901. The OCMI or their representative 

(with by direction authority) shall use a standard CG Memo to document their 

recommendation to the ACRB. OCMIs are required to forward all cases that have 

been opened, even those with negative endorsements, to the ACRB for final 

disposition. Example: The applicant has provided all the required documentation 

except for a driving record check, or employment verification. The OCMI shall 

document all attempts made to contact the applicant for the missing documentation 

in the MISLE Enforcement Activity. If the applicant fails to provide the requested 

documentation within 60 days from the first documentation submittal, the OCMI 

would forward the case with a negative endorsement. This information is necessary 

to aid Commandant (CG-545) in answering any inquiries that may result. Regardless, 

all administrative clemency application packages that do not meet the minimum 

submittal requirements (included in the administrative clemency checklist) and the 

time limitation requirements of 46 CFR 5.901, should normally be given a negative 

endorsement. If the OCMI provides a positive endorsement, the reasons shall be 

fully detailed in the endorsement memo. Those application packages that do not 

conform will be returned to the submitting unit. 

A.7. RESPONSE TO 


MOTION TO REOPEN


Generally, the Office of Investigations and Analysis, Commandant 

(CG-545) will represent the Coast Guard in all cases where a motion has been filed 

with the Coast Guard Docketing Center to reopen the Hearing. The ACRB 

Administrator will review the information submitted by the mariner for compliance 

with this chapter and will either favor or oppose the motion. In a case where a 

Hearing is scheduled, 

Commandant (CG-545) will request that an IO assigned to the OCMI nearest the 

mariner’s location be designated to represent the Coast Guard. 

A.7.a. Appeals by the Coast Guard 


If the Coast Guard opposes the motion to reopen and the ALJ grants the motion and 

subsequently orders that the mariner be issued a new MMC, the Coast Guard may 

appeal the ALJ’s Decision in accordance with 33 CFR 20.1001. The Coast Guard 

shall appeal a granted motion to reopen and subsequent order authorizing the 

issuance of a new MMC for the following reasons: 

• the respondent failed to meet the minimum waiting period of one year as 

required by 46 CFR 5.901; 

• the respondent failed to meet the requirements to be granted a waiver of the 

minimum three waiting period for offenses listed in 46 CFR 5.59 and 5.61(a); 

C5-3 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT 

PART C: ENFORCEMENT 

CHAPTER 5: ADMINISTRATIVE CLEMENCY 

• the respondent failed to meet the minimum requirements of an administrative 

clemency application package as detailed in this chapter; or 

• the documents provided by the respondent could not be verified or were 

false. 

All notice of appeals for administrative clemency cases shall be approved by 

Commandant (CG-545) prior to filing with the Docketing Center. 

A MISLE Enforcement Activity shall be opened upon receiving any documentation 

as part of an administrative clemency application package or a motion to reopen the 

record of a S&R proceeding. For clemency requests going to the ACRB, a prompt 

date should be set for 60 days upon the opening of the Enforcement Activity. This 

Enforcement Activity shall be created from the enforcement activity that documents 

the surrender or revocation of the MMC(s). All documentation submitted by the 

applicant and the OCMI’s endorsement memo should be scanned and attached as 

Correspondence. The Enforcement Activity shall be completed in accordance with 

the applicable sections of the appropriate MISLE Process Guide. If all 

documentation has been attached to the MISLE activity, the submission 

requirements of Section B have been met and control of the activity transferred to 

CG-545, there is no requirement to forward a hard copy of the application package. 

The IO should alert CG-545 via email or phone that a package has been forwarded in 

MISLE. If a hard copy of the package is forwarded, it shall meet the requirements of 

Section B. 

A.8.


ADMINISTRATIVE 


CLEMENCY DATA 


ENTRY


A.9. CLEMENCY 


PROCESS AFTER A 


DECISION IS 


RENDERED


Once a decision has been rendered, the ACRB or the ALJ will provide 

documentation to the applicant granting or denying clemency. If granted, the 

applicant will be required to contact the National Maritime Center (NMC) to 

complete the application process in accordance with 46 CFR, Parts 10 and/or 12. 

The NMC and the submitting unit will be notified that clemency has been granted; 

that the application shall be processed as an application for an original MMC. If 

clemency is denied, the applicant and the submitting unit will be notified of the cause 

for denial, and of the requirements for submission of the next application. See C.7. 

below for guidance with regard to resubmission of a mariner’s clemency application. 

B. SUBMITTING A CLEMENCY APPLICATION PACKAGE


B.1. REQUIRED All administrative clemency packages that are forwarded to CG-545 shall be 

FORMAT submitted in a folder with the checklist (Figure C5-1) attached on the left side of the 

folder and the cover sheets (Figure C5-2) and supporting documentation attached on 

the right side. The IO shall remove the cover sheets that do not apply. A copy of 

the MISLE activity summary document is not required. 

C5-4 
_______________________________________________________ 

USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT 

PART C: ENFORCEMENT 

CHAPTER 5: ADMINISTRATIVE CLEMENCY 

B.2. As stated in A.4. above, IOs shall verify each document submitted by the applicant. 

INVESTIGATING The IO shall contact each reference and make a notation at the bottom of each letter 

OFFICER TO CONTACT stating that the information has been verified. REFERENCES


B.3. MINIMUM 	 The checklist (Figure C5-1) provides a complete list of items needed to perfect the 

CONTENTS administrative clemency application package. The following is a list of the minimum 

documentation required: 

• Complete and signed application for original license, certificate of registry 

and/or MMD; 

• Letter from Applicant including waiver request if applicable; 

• Letters from employer(s) since the revocation or surrender of the MMC; 

• Letters of character reference; 

• Proof of rehabilitation or cure; 

• FBI Criminal background and Drivers record check*; 

• Any other information the applicant may wish to be considered. 

*The use of NCIC/NLETS is not authorized to conduct these record checks. 

B.4.	 TIME LIMITS In accordance with 46 CFR 5.901, the minimum waiting period for offenses listed in 

46 CFR 5.59 and 5.61(a) is THREE years. A revocation or surrender of a MMC for 

a mariner’s refusal to take a drug test shall be considered an offense listed in 46 CFR 

5.59 and the three-year waiting period applies. All other offenses require a ONEyear waiting period. 

B.5.	 WAIVERS 46 CFR 5.901 allows for a waiver of the three-year minimum waiting period. There is 

no waiver provision for the one-year period. All requests for a waiver of the threeyear waiting period shall be in writing and forwarded with the applicant’s 

administrative clemency package. The mariner’s request should explain why he or 

she feels that the three-year waiting period should be waived and provide ample 

documentation to justify their request. IOs should advise the mariner that there is no 

obligation to grant a waiver and any omissions or non-compliance with other 

minimum requirements would reduce the likelihood of the waiver being granted. 

Waivers for offense described in B.5.b. and B.5.c. below will only be granted once to 

an applicant for clemency. 

B.5.a. Good Character


The applicant must demonstrate "Good Character" within the community for a 

period exceeding three years from the date of occurrence that resulted in the 

surrender. For example, the mariner committed an offense in 1989, but the 

applicant's MMC was not surrendered until 1994. The applicant applies for clemency 

in 1995, but since three years have not passed since the surrender the applicant must 

seek a waiver of the time limitations. If the applicant has met the “good character” 

C5-5 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT 

PART C: ENFORCEMENT 

CHAPTER 5: ADMINISTRATIVE CLEMENCY 

criteria between 1989 and 1995, a waiver may be granted. For the waiver to be 

granted the three years must be continuous; jail time, or time spent avoiding 

prosecution does not count. "Good Character" can be demonstrated by: 

• Absence of any negative incidents with law enforcement authorities; 

• Self-motivated efforts towards and completion of a rehabilitation program; 

• Evidence of steady employment; 

• Appropriate support of family and financial responsibilities; 

• Letters of reference from members of the community, including neighbors, 

business associates, church officials, community representatives, fellow 

employees, etc.; 

• Active participation in positive social and community activities; and 

• If drugs or alcohol were contributing factors to the surrender or revocation, 

the applicant must also show cure and/or rehabilitation. 

B.5.b. Misconduct, Conviction for Wrongful Simple 


Possession or Drug Use 


If the surrender or revocation resulted from misconduct or conviction for wrongful 

simple possession of a dangerous drug (personal quantity, this does not include 

distribution, intent to distribute, trafficking, or smuggling), use of a dangerous drug, 

or refusal to take a drug test; the applicant must have: 

• Successfully completed a bona fide drug abuse rehabilitation program and; 

• Demonstrated complete non-association with dangerous drugs for a 

minimum period of one year following completion of the rehabilitation 

program and; 

• Be actively participating in a bona fide drug abuse-monitoring program. 

B.5.c. Alcohol Use, or Related to Alcohol, e.g. NDRA 


violations 


If the surrender or revocation resulted from alcohol use, or related to alcohol, e.g. 

NDRA violations, the applicant must have: 

• Successfully completed a bona fide alcohol abuse rehabilitation program and; 

• Be actively participating in a bona fide alcohol abuse-monitoring program. 

C5-6 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT 

PART C: ENFORCEMENT 

CHAPTER 5: ADMINISTRATIVE CLEMENCY 

B.6. APPLICANT’S 


LETTER


B.7. APPLICANT’S 


LETTER(S) OF 


EMPLOYMENT


B.8. APPLICANT’S 


LETTER(S) OF 


REFERENCE


For an applicant’s letter to be accepted the following format shall be followed: 

• The letter shall be legibly written or typewritten (preferred) on an 8.5 x 11 

sheet(s) of paper; 

• The letter must address the applicant’s prior problem and how he/she has 

overcome the problem, e.g. drug or alcohol rehabilitation, remedial training, 

counseling, etc., and how he or she intends to avoid the prior problem in the 

future; 

• The letter must also address the applicant’s employment history since the 

surrender or revocation. A chronological listing to include: the dates 

employed, name of business, position held, and a point of contact for the 

employer (name and phone number) is the preferred format. All periods of 

extended unemployment, e.g. workmen compensation, welfare, medical 

reasons, etc., must be explained; and 

• If applicable, the letter must state that a waiver of the three-year waiting 

period is requested. 

For an applicant’s letter(s) of employment to be accepted the following format shall 

be followed: 

• The letter shall be legibly written or typewritten (preferred) on an 8.5 x 11 

sheet(s) of paper, and on company letterhead if possible; and 

• The employer(s) must address the applicant’s work history, e.g. performance 

of duties, interaction with fellow employees, etc.; whether the applicant is or 

was subject to random drug testing; duration of employment, and if no longer 

employed, the reason why the applicant left. 

• The letter must have the employer’s contact information. 

For an applicant’s letter(s) of references to be accepted the following format shall be 

followed: 

• The letter shall be legibly written or typewritten (preferred) on an 8.5 x 11 

sheet(s) of paper, and include a phone number where the individual may be 

reached during the day; and 

• Letters should address the applicant’s prior problem. This is important for 

the reference letter to have any real meaning. The ACRB wants to see if 

others have noted how the applicant’s lifestyle has changed. Letters from 

close family members are acceptable, however, the ACRB would prefer to see 

letters from coworkers, work supervisors, drug and alcohol sponsors or 

counselors, community leaders, e.g. council members, church leaders. 

B.9. PROOF OF The regulations require the applicant to provide proof of rehabilitation or cure in 

CURE OR order to show that the reason for the revocation or surrender is no longer valid. The 

REHABILITATION


C5-7 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT 

PART C: ENFORCEMENT 

CHAPTER 5: ADMINISTRATIVE CLEMENCY 

following Sections establish CG policy for demonstrating rehabilitation or cure. 

B.9.a. Proof of Cure in Drug USE Cases 


When revocation or surrender resulted from drug use, refusal to test, or violation of a 

dangerous drug law and the mariner has been determined to be a user of a dangerous 

drug, proof shall include: 

• Completion of a state or local government licensed or recognized primary 

rehabilitation program (inpatient or outpatient). 

• One year of non-association with dangerous drugs following completion of the 

rehabilitation program. The one-year period can be included in any after care 

program directed by the rehabilitation center. Non-association shall be 

demonstrated by: 

o The submission of at least 12 random unannounced drug tests conducted in 

accordance with 49 C.F.R. Part 40, spread reasonably throughout the one year 

non-association period; or 

o If employed within the marine industry, or any other transportation mode 

that requires random drug testing, and the applicant has received a letter from 

an MRO attesting that the applicant is a low risk to return to dangerous druguse, the IO may use those test results as part of the minimum 12 random 

tests required; and 

o Participation in AA/NA (or similar support-type group) meetings for the 

entire one-year-period at a minimum of 2 meetings per month. Proof may be 

provided by submitting attendance records, certificates of achievement, or 

certification from his or her sponsor attesting to attendance and participation 

in support group meetings. Proof of attendance shall be provided up to the 

time of application; and 

• A letter from a MRO attesting that the applicant is a low risk to return to druguse in accordance with 46 CFR 16.201(f). 

B.9.b. Proof of Cure in Conviction of a dangerous drug 


law Cases 


When the revocation or surrender resulted from a conviction of a dangerous drug law 

or refusal to test, and the mariner has been determined to not be a user, proof shall 

include: 

• A recent SAP or MRO evaluation attesting that the applicant is not a user of, 

or addicted to dangerous drugs. 

• One year of non-association with dangerous drugs. Non-association shall be 

demonstrated by: 

• The submission of at least 12 random unannounced drug tests conducted in 

accordance with 49 C.F.R. Part 40, spread reasonably throughout the one year 

non-association period; or 

If still employed within the marine industry, or any other transportation mode that 

C5-8 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT 

PART C: ENFORCEMENT 

CHAPTER 5: ADMINISTRATIVE CLEMENCY 

B.10. CRIMINAL 


RECORDS AND 


DRIVING RECORDS


requires random drug testing, and the applicant has received a letter from an MRO 

attesting that the applicant is a low risk to return to dangerous drug-use, the IO may 

use those test results as part of the minimum 12 random tests required. 

The one-year of non-association may be waived if: 

• The applicant has been subjected to random drug testing and has not tested 

positive or refused to take a test within the last year; and 

• The applicant provides at a minimum, 6 current random DOT tests; and 

• The applicant’s employment history and personal references indicate a 

demonstrated change of lifestyle. 

B.9.c. Proof of Cure in Alcohol-related Offense Cases 


When the revocation or surrender resulted from an alcohol related offense, proof 

shall include: 

• Completion of a state or local government licensed or recognized 

rehabilitation program; and 

• Participation in AA meetings for one-year after completion of the 

rehabilitation program at a minimum of 2 meetings per month. Proof may be 

provided by submitting attendance records, certificates of achievement, or 

certification from his or her sponsor attesting to attendance and participation 

in support group meetings. Proof of attendance shall be provided up to the 

time of application. 

B.9.d. Proof of Rehabilitation in Misconduct, 


Negligence, and Violation of Law/Reg Cases 


When the revocation or surrender resulted from Misconduct, Negligence, Violation 

of Law or Regulation, proof shall include some evidence of: 

• Remedial training relating to the incident; and/or 

• Therapy or professional counseling. 

B.9.e. Proof of Cure in Physical or Mental 


Incompetence Cases 


When the revocation or surrender resulted from physical or mental incompetence, 

proof shall include: 

• A report from a physician specializing in the condition that resulted in the 

physical or mental incompetence. The report shall attest that the cause of the 

incompetence is no longer valid, and the applicant is fit for duty. 

OCMIs shall require the applicant to provide a copy of their official criminal and 

driving records. The applicant shall obtain a copy of their criminal record from the 

FBI (see B.10.a. below for instructions) and their driving record from the 

Department of Motor Vehicles from the State in which they reside. OCMIs shall not 

accept background checks that appear to be altered, or that are more than two 

C5-9 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT 

PART C: ENFORCEMENT 

CHAPTER 5: ADMINISTRATIVE CLEMENCY 

months old when the mariner submits his or her completed application. OCMIs 

shall make it clear to the applicant that full disclosure is very important and that any 

attempt to deceive or mislead the ACRB will normally result in denial of the 

application. Additionally, the applicant must understand that in the event the ACRB 

grants clemency, the NMC has to follow their guidance and the provisions of 46 CFR 

Parts 10 and/or 12 concerning the issuance of an original MMC, and they may 

require additional information prior to making a determination on the issuance of the 

MMC. If a conviction or violation is found by the NMC, the applicant may be 

required to comply with the NMC’s waiting periods before re-applying. IO’s shall 

not access NCIC/NLETS to conduct these record checks. 

B.10.a. Criminal Records 


The applicant shall, as permitted by 28 CFR, Part 16.30, request a copy of their 

criminal record directly from the Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI) at the 

following address: 

Federal Bureau of Investigations 

CJIS Division 

Attention: SCU, Module D-2 

1000 Custer Hollow Road 

Clarksburg, West Virginia 26306-0171 

A set of rolled, inked fingerprint impressions, name and date and place of birth must 

accompany the request. As of April 2008, the fee for each request is $18.00 (see 28 

CFR 16.33 for current fee) and should be paid in the form of a certified check or 

money order payable to the Treasury of the United States. The local Regional 

Examination Center (REC) or law enforcement agency may assist the mariner in 

preparing the necessary Fingerprint card(s) for submission to the FBI. This is not a 

quick process and the applicant should plan accordingly so as to obtain a copy of 

their record for submission with their clemency application within the 60-day time 

requirements. To ensure authenticity, the mariner shall be directed to open the 

envelope containing the report only in the presence of the IO. 

C5-10 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT 

PART C: ENFORCEMENT 

CHAPTER 5: ADMINISTRATIVE CLEMENCY 

B.10.b. Driving Records 


The applicant shall, as permitted by 46 CFR 10.201(i)(4) and 12.02-4(d)(4), request a 

copy of their national driving record directly from the National Highway Traffic 

Safety Administration maintained National Driver Register (NDR) at the following 

address: 

National Driver Register 

Nassif Building 

400 7th Street, S.W. 

Room 612A (NPO-124) 

Washington, DC 20590-0001 

There are two methods for the applicant to acquire their driving record from the 

NDR. 

Request a Form NDR-PRV from NDR and submit the completed form to them; or 

Provide the NDR the following information on a notarized letter: 

Full legal name; 

Other names used; 

Complete mailing address; 

Driver license number; 

Eye color; 

Social security number; 

Height; 

Weight; and 

Sex. 

B.10.c. OCMI Discretion 


In addition to the above minimum requirements, the OCMI may require the mariner 

to provide additional local/state criminal/driving records to ensure that all local 

criminal/driving information is captured. Remember that the mariner may live in an 

area different from their work location or state of residence; therefore, you may 

require the mariner to provide records from several states. In general these records 

may be obtained from various agencies such as the State Police, District Attorney's 

Office, or Department of Motor Vehicles. Some applicants may not be able to 

obtain their records due to local/state laws that prohibit the release of criminal 

records, even to the individual to whom the records pertain. When these records are 

required by the OCMI, the mariner must get a letter from the local/state agency to 

C5-11 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT 

PART C: ENFORCEMENT 

CHAPTER 5: ADMINISTRATIVE CLEMENCY 

B.11.


APPLICATION FOR 


NEW LICENSE OR 


DOCUMENT


which that pertains (to be verified by the IO.) 

Applicants must provide a completed, signed application for MMD and/or license 

required for an original issue. All blocks must be completed. Any “Yes” answers in 

the convictions section shall be fully detailed in an attached statement. It is extremely 

important that the applicant provide full disclosure of ALL convictions and sufficient 

details on the circumstances associated with the other “Yes” answers. Applicants are 

not required to submit photos or physicals with the application. Physicals are only 

required for clemency requests for physical incompetence. 

C. ADMINISTRATIVE CLEMENCY REVIEW BOARD


C.1.	 GENERAL The ACRB shall consist of staff members of the Office of Investigations and 

Casualty Analysis, Commandant (CG-545). The ACRB Administrator is responsible 

for receiving and conducting an initial review for completeness of all Administrative 

Clemency application packages. Packages not complying with the requirements of 

the chapter will be returned to the submitting unit for correction. The ACRB should 

not be convened unless there are at least three members present, one of which should 

be a professional mariner who is a staff member of CG-545. 

C.2.


RECOMMENDATION OF 


THE ACRB 


The recommendations of the ACRB are presented to the Chief, Investigations 

Division (CG-5451) (the designated representative for the Commandant) only after 

the ACRB has convened and all sitting members have reviewed the applicant’s 

package and their individual concerns have been adequately addressed. On behalf of 

the Commandant, CG-5451 may endorse the ACRB’s recommendation or require 

that they reconvene to address specific issues that are unique to the case. 

C.3. FINAL 


AGENCY ACTION 


REGARDING 


ADMINISTRATIVE 


CLEMENCY REQUESTS


C.4. NOTIFYING 


THE CLEMENCY 


APPLICANT


The Commandant’s decision is final agency action and there is no Coast Guard 

mechanism for appeal, however, the mariner may request reconsideration of the 

decision. Any request for reconsideration should be submitted to Commandant (CG5451) via the OCMI (see C.6. below). 

If a mariner’s application for clemency is granted or denied, CG-5451 will duly notify 

the mariner and the submitting unit of the decision via written correspondence. This 

correspondence will also outline the steps the mariner needs to take to complete the 

process or deficiencies noted in the applicant’s package and what minimum 

requirements the mariner must meet prior to resubmitting their application for 

clemency. It is the mariner’s responsibility to meet those requirements and to 

coordinate the resubmission to CG-5451 via the OCMI. 

C5-12 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT 

PART C: ENFORCEMENT 

CHAPTER 5: ADMINISTRATIVE CLEMENCY 

C.5.


RESUBMISSION OF 


APPLICATION FOR 


ADMINISTRATIVE 


CLEMENCY


The ACRB Administrator will maintain a mariner’s original clemency application 

package on file for a minimum of three years. If the mariner’s resubmission occurs 

within the first three years after denial, the mariner needs only to submit the 

necessary documentation stated in the denial letter to the ACRB via the OCMI. The 

OCMI shall verify the documentation submitted and attach the same as 

correspondence in the MISLE Administrative Clemency Enforcement Activity and 

ensure that all issues in the denial letter are resolved prior to resubmitting. The 

OCMI shall provide a recommendation of approval or denial based on the mariner’s 

compliance with the requirements of the denial letter. If the mariner waits beyond 

three years there should be no expectation that their previous application is still on 

file with CG-545 and he/she shall be directed to submit a new clemency application 

complying with all requirements of this Chapter. 

C.6. REQUEST FOR 


RECONSIDERATION OF 


DECISIONS 


REGARDING 


ADMINISTRATIVE 


CLEMENCY


Any request for reconsideration should be processed through the OCMI for the 

mariner’s initial clemency application. The request should be addressed to 

Commandant (CG-545) for processing. The mariner’s request shall address the basic 

premise as to why he or she feels that the Coast Guard’s decision is in error or that 

the reversal of the decision is warranted. Upon review, a response will be forwarded 

to the mariner and the submitting unit. 

C5-13 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT 

PART C: ENFORCEMENT 

CHAPTER 5: ADMINISTRATIVE CLEMENCY 

FIGURE C5-1: Administrative Clemency Checklist 

ADMINISTRATIVE CLEMENCY CHECKLIST 

Before submitting the Administrative Clemency application to CG-545, OCMIs shall ensure that 

the following documentation is complete: 

Yes No N/A 

Complete & signed application for an original License/MMD 

Letter from the applicant; includes waiver request Y / N 

_______ Letters from Employers (indicate # of ltrs) 

_______ Letters of character reference (indicate # of ltrs) 

FBI criminal background delivered to IO in sealed envelope 

Driving record from the State of ______________________ 

Certificate/letter of completion of rehabilitation program if 

applicable 

12 random DOT drug tests spread reasonably throughout the 

1 year period since completion of rehabilitation program if 

applicable 

Attendance at support group (AA/NA) for 1 year since 

completion of rehabilitation program with a minimum of 2 

meetings per month if applicable 

Medical Review Officer (MRO) low risk letter if applicable 

Evaluation from a Substance Abuse Specialist (SAP)or MRO 

if applicable 

Remedial Training if applicable 

Therapy or professional counseling if applicable 

Physician’s report if applicable 

C5-14 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT 

PART C: ENFORCEMENT 

CHAPTER 5: ADMINISTRATIVE CLEMENCY 

FIGURE C5-2: Administrative Clemency Cover Sheets 

Applicant’s Letter 

For an applicant’s letter to be accepted the following format shall be followed: 

1. The letter shall be legibly written or typewritten (preferred) on an 8.5” x 11” sheet(s) of paper; 

2. The letter must address the applicant’s prior problem and how he or she has overcome the problem, 

e.g. drug or alcohol rehabilitation, remedial training, counseling, etc., and how he or she intends to 

avoid the prior problem in the future; 

3. The letter must also address the applicant’s employment history since the surrender or revocation. 

A chronological listing to include: the dates employed, name of business, position held, and a point 

of contact for the employer (name and phone number) is the preferred format. All periods of 

extended unemployment, e.g. workmen compensation, welfare, medical reasons, etc., must be 

explained; and 

4. If applicable, the letter must state that a waiver of the three-year waiting period is requested. 

Applicant’s Letter 

C5-15 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT 

PART C: ENFORCEMENT 

CHAPTER 5: ADMINISTRATIVE CLEMENCY 

Application for MMD/License 

Applicants must provide a completed, signed application for MMD and/or license required for an 

original issue. All blocks must be completed. Any “Yes” answers in the convictions section shall be fully 

detailed in an attached statement. It is extremely important that the applicant provide full disclosure of ALL 

convictions and sufficient details on the circumstances associated with the other “Yes” answers. Applicants 

are not required to submit photos or physicals with the application. Physicals are only required for 

clemency requests for physical incompetence. 

Application for MMD/License 

C5-16 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT 

PART C: ENFORCEMENT 

CHAPTER 5: ADMINISTRATIVE CLEMENCY 

Letters of Employment 

For an applicant’s letter(s) of employment to be accepted, the following format shall be followed: 

1. The letter shall be legibly written or typewritten (preferred) on an 8” x 11” sheet(s) of paper, and on 

company letterhead if possible; and 

2. The employer(s) must address the applicant’s work history, e.g. performance of duties, interaction 

with fellow employees, etc.; whether the applicant is or was subject to random drug testing; duration 

of employment, and if no longer employed, the reason why the applicant left. 

3. The letter must have the employer’s contact information. 

IOs shall contact each reference and make a notation at bottom of each letter stating that the 

information has been verified. 

Letters of Employment 

C5-17 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT 

PART C: ENFORCEMENT 

CHAPTER 5: ADMINISTRATIVE CLEMENCY 

Letters of Reference 

For an applicant’s letter(s) of references to be accepted the following format shall be followed: 

1. The letter shall be legibly written or typewritten (preferred) on an 8” x 11” sheet(s) of paper, and 

include a phone number where the individual may be reached during the day; and 

2. Letters should address the applicant’s prior problem. This is important for the reference letter to 

have any real meaning. The ACRB wants to see if others have noted how the applicant’s lifestyle 

has changed. Letters from close family members are acceptable, however, the ACRB would prefer 

to see letters from coworkers, supervisors, drug and alcohol sponsors or counselors, community 

leaders, e.g. council members, church leaders. 

•

•

IOs shall contact each reference and make a notation at bottom of each letter stating that the 

information has been verified. 

Letters of Reference 

C5-18 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT 

PART C: ENFORCEMENT 

CHAPTER 5: ADMINISTRATIVE CLEMENCY 

Criminal Background and Driving Record 

The applicant is responsible for obtaining his/her driving record from their local Motor Vehicle 

Administration and submitting the results with the administrative clemency request. 

For a criminal background check, the FBI requires a set of rolled, inked fingerprint impressions, name, 

date and place of birth to accompany the request. As of April 2008, the fee for each request is $18.00 

(see 28 CFR 16.33 for current fee) and should be paid in the form of a certified check or money order 

payable to the Treasury of the United States. This is not a quick process and the applicant should plan 

accordingly to obtain a copy of their record for submission with their clemency application. To ensure 

authenticity, the applicant should be directed to open the envelope containing the report only in the 

presence of the Investigating Officer. The applicant shall send his/her criminal background request to 

the following address: 

Federal Bureau of Investigations 

 CJIS Division 

Attention: SCU, Module D-2 

1000 Custer Hollow Road 

Clarksburg, West Virginia 26306-0171 

Criminal Background and Driving Record 

C5-19 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT 

PART C: ENFORCEMENT 

CHAPTER 5: ADMINISTRATIVE CLEMENCY 

Proof of Cure for Drug Use 

When revocation or surrender resulted from drug use, refusal to test, or violation of a 

dangerous drug law and mariner is determined to be a user, proof shall include: 

1. Completion of a state or local government licensed or recognized primary rehabilitation program 

(inpatient or outpatient); and 

2. One year of non-association with dangerous drugs following completion of the rehabilitation 

program. The one-year period can be included in any after care program directed by the 

rehabilitation center. Non-association shall be demonstrated by: 

a. The submission of at least 12 random unannounced drug tests conducted in accordance with 49 

C.F.R. Part 40, spread reasonably throughout the one year non-association period; or 

i. If still employed within the marine industry, or any other transportation mode that requires 

random drug testing, and the applicant has received a letter from an MRO attesting that the 

applicant is a low risk to return to dangerous drug use, the IO may use those test results as 

part of the minimum 12 random tests required; and 

b. Participation in AA/NA (or similar support group) meetings for the entire one-year-period at a 

minimum of two meetings per month. Proof may be provided by submitting attendance records, 

certificates of achievement, or certification from his or her sponsor attesting to attendance and 

participation in support group meetings. Proof shall be provided up to the time of application; 

and 

3. A letter from a MRO attesting that the applicant is a low risk to return to drug-use in accordance 

with 46 CFR 16.201(f). 

Proof of Cure for Drug Use 

C5-20 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT 

PART C: ENFORCEMENT 

CHAPTER 5: ADMINISTRATIVE CLEMENCY 

Proof of Cure for Conviction of a Dangerous Drug Law 

When the revocation or surrender resulted from a conviction of a dangerous drug law or 

refusal to test, and it has been determined that he or she is not a user, proof shall 

include: 

1. A recent SAP or MRO evaluation attesting that the applicant is not a user of, or addicted to 

dangerous drugs; and 

2. One year of non-association with dangerous drugs. Non-association shall be demonstrated by: 

a. The submission of at least 12 random unannounced drug tests conducted in accordance with 49 

C.F.R. Part 40, spread reasonably throughout the one year non-association period; or 

i. If still employed within the marine industry, or any other transportation mode that 

requires random drug testing, and the applicant has received a letter from a MRO attesting 

that the applicant is a low risk to return to dangerous drug-use, the IO may use those test 

results as part of the minimum 12 random tests required. 

3. The one-year of non-association may be waived if: 

•

a. The applicant has been subjected to random DOT drug testing and has not tested positive or 

refused to take a test within the last year; and 

b. The applicant provides at a minimum, six current random DOT tests; and 

c. The applicant’s employment history and personal references indicate a demonstrated change of 

lifestyle. 

Proof of Cure for Conviction of a Dangerous Drug Law 

C5-21 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT 

PART C: ENFORCEMENT 

CHAPTER 5: ADMINISTRATIVE CLEMENCY 

Proof of Cure for Alcohol Related Offenses 

When the revocation or surrender resulted from an alcohol related offense, proof shall 

include: 

1. Completion of a state or local government licensed or recognized alcohol rehabilitation program; 

and 

2. Participation in AA meetings for one-year following completion of the rehabilitation program at a 

minimum of two meetings per month. Proof may be provided by submitting attendance records, 

certificates of achievement, or certification from his or her sponsor attesting to attendance and 

participation in support group meetings. Proof shall be provided up to the time of application. 

Proof of Cure for Alcohol Related Offenses 

C5-22 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT 

PART C: ENFORCEMENT 

CHAPTER 5: ADMINISTRATIVE CLEMENCY 

Proof of Cure for Misconduct, Negligence, Violation of Law or Regulation 

When the revocation or surrender resulted from Misconduct, Negligence, Violation of 

Law or Regulation, proof shall include evidence of:

1. Remedial training relating to the incident; and/or 

2. Therapy or professional counseling. 

Proof of Cure for Misconduct, Negligence, Violation of Law or Regulation 

C5-23 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT 

PART C: ENFORCEMENT 

CHAPTER 5: ADMINISTRATIVE CLEMENCY 

Proof of Cure for Physical or Mental Incompetence 

When the revocation or surrender resulted from physical or mental incompetence, proof 

shall include: 

A report from a physician specializing in the condition that resulted in the physical or mental 

incompetence. The report shall attest that the cause of the incompetence is no longer valid, and the 

applicant is fit for duty. 

Proof of Cure for Physical or Mental Incompetence 

C5-24 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT 

PART C: ENFORCEMENT 

CHAPTER 5: ADMINISTRATIVE CLEMENCY 

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 

C5-25 
USCG Marine Safety Manual 

Volume V: Investigations and Enforcement

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

Chapter Six: 

Drug and Alcohol Program
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 6: DRUG AND ALCOHOL PROGRAM 

C6-i 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

A. DRUG AND ALCOHOL PROGRAM ..................... 1

A.1. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................................................1

A.2. CODE OF FEDERAL REGULATIONS (CFR) REFERENCES ...................................................................................................1

A.3. DEFINITIONS ....................................................................................................................................................................1

A.3.a. Merchant Mariners' Credentials (MMCs)................................................................................................................1

A.3.b. Serious Marine Incident (SMI).................................................................................................................................1

A.3.c. Crewmember.............................................................................................................................................................2

A.3.d. Operation..................................................................................................................................................................2

A.3.e. Marine Employer......................................................................................................................................................3

A.3.f. Law Enforcement Officer. .........................................................................................................................................3

A.3.g. Medical Review Officer (MRO)................................................................................................................................3

A.3.h. Intoxicant..................................................................................................................................................................3

A.3.i. Dangerous Drug........................................................................................................................................................3

A.3.j. Service Agent.............................................................................................................................................................3

A.3.k. Consortium/Third Party Administrator (C/TPA)......................................................................................................3

A.3.l. Sponsoring Organization ..........................................................................................................................................4

A.3.m. Refuse to Submit ......................................................................................................................................................4

A.3.n. Designated Employer Representative (DER) ...........................................................................................................4

A.4. APPLICABILITY ................................................................................................................................................................4

A.4.a. General.....................................................................................................................................................................4

A.4.b. Safety Sensitive Positions.........................................................................................................................................4

A.4.c. Fishing Industry Vessels...........................................................................................................................................5

A.4.d. Marine Employer Financial Status...........................................................................................................................5

A.4.e. Employee Payment Status.........................................................................................................................................5

A.4.f. Uninspected Sailing School Vessels..........................................................................................................................5

A.4.g. Cargo Handling Personnel On Unmanned Barges..................................................................................................5

A.4.h. Foreign Nationals.....................................................................................................................................................6

A.5. TESTING METHODOLOGY.................................................................................................................................................6

A.5.a. Chemical Testing For Dangerous Drugs .................................................................................................................6

A.5.b. Other DOT/Federal Agency Drug Tests...................................................................................................................6

A.5.c. Alcohol Testing.........................................................................................................................................................6

A.6. COLLECTION REQUIREMENTS ..........................................................................................................................................7

A.6.a. Dangerous Drug Testing Specimens ........................................................................................................................7

A.6.b. Alcohol Testing Samples...........................................................................................................................................7

A.7. LABORATORY ANALYSIS .................................................................................................................................................7

A.8. EMPLOYEE RESPONSIBILITIES ..........................................................................................................................................8

B. MARINE EMPLOYER RESPONSIBILITIES............... 8

B.1. GENERAL..........................................................................................................................................................................8

B.2. CONFIDENTIALITY............................................................................................................................................................8

B.3. EMPLOYEE ASSISTANCE PROGRAM (EAP).......................................................................................................................8

B.4. REPORTING POSITIVE AND NON-NEGATIVE DRUG TESTS ...................................................................................................9

B.4.a. Individuals With MMCs (Merchant Mariner Credentials).......................................................................................9

B.4.b. Individuals Without MMCs.......................................................................................................................................9

B.5. REPORTING A REFUSAL TO TEST......................................................................................................................................9

B.6. MANAGEMENT INFORMATION SYSTEM (MIS)..................................................................................................................9

B.7. SEASONAL EMPLOYEES..................................................................................................................................................10

B.8. SHARING CREWMEMBERS AND INDEPENDENT MARINERS..............................................................................................10
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 6: DRUG AND ALCOHOL PROGRAM 

C6-ii 

B.9. CHECK OF EMPLOYEES’ DRUG AND ALCOHOL TESTING RECORD.....................................................................................11

B.9.a. Marine Employers requesting information.............................................................................................................11

B.9.a.1. Actions After Receiving Information ...............................................................................................................12

B.9.b. Marine Employers providing information..............................................................................................................12

B.10. REQUIRED RECORDKEEPING.........................................................................................................................................12

B.10.a. Positive Test Results and/or Test Refusals ...........................................................................................................12

B.10.b. Negative Test Results............................................................................................................................................12

B.10.c. Pre-employment records.......................................................................................................................................12

B.10.d. Record of all testing performed............................................................................................................................12

B.10.e. Request for Employee Drug and Alcohol Testing Results ....................................................................................13

B.10.f. Release of Employee Drug and Alcohol Testing Results.......................................................................................13

C. OCCASIONS TO CONDUCT DRUG AND ALCOHOL TESTS .... 13

C.1. PRE-EMPLOYMENT.........................................................................................................................................................13

C.1.a. Pre-employment waivers........................................................................................................................................13

C.2. PERIODIC........................................................................................................................................................................13

C.3. RANDOM ........................................................................................................................................................................14

C.3.a. Annual Rate............................................................................................................................................................14

C.3.a.1. How To Determine The Number Of Tests Required........................................................................................14

C.3.b. Program Requirements for inspected vessels.........................................................................................................14

C.3.c. Program requirements for uninspected vessels......................................................................................................15

C.4. REASONABLE CAUSE......................................................................................................................................................15

C.4.a. Reasonable cause testing for dangerous drugs (46 CFR 16.250).........................................................................15

C.4.a.1. Definition of reasonably suspected .................................................................................................................15

C.4.b. Reasonable cause testing for intoxication (33 CFR 95.035)..................................................................................16

C.5. POST ACCIDENT .............................................................................................................................................................16

C.5.a. Reportable marine casualties.................................................................................................................................16

C.5.b. SMI or Probable SMI Casualties ...........................................................................................................................16

C.5.c. Collection timeframe ..............................................................................................................................................17

C.5.d. Post Accident Testing Reporting Requirements .....................................................................................................17

D. POSITIVE/NON-NEGATIVE DRUG AND ALCOHOL TESTS.... 17

D.1. POSITIVE DRUG TEST DEFINED.......................................................................................................................................17

D.2. NON-NEGATIVE DRUG TEST DEFINED............................................................................................................................18

D.3. REPORTS OF POSITIVE AND NON-NEGATIVE TESTS.........................................................................................................18

D.4. NEGATIVE –DILUTE DRUG TEST REPORTS.....................................................................................................................18

D.5. CONSEQUENCES OF POSITIVE AND NON-NEGATIVE TEST ..............................................................................................18

D.6. ALCOHOL TESTS THAT SHOW THE PRESENCE OF ALCOHOL.............................................................................................19

E. REFUSAL TO TEST ........................... 19

E.1. GENERAL........................................................................................................................................................................19

E.1.a. Refusals by Individuals with MMCs.......................................................................................................................19

E.1.b. Refusals by Individuals without MMCs..................................................................................................................19

F. DRUG AND ALCOHOL PROGRAM INSPECTOR (DAPI) ..... 19

F.1. WHAT IS A DAPI?...........................................................................................................................................................19

F.2. DAPI ENFORCEMENT TOOLS ..........................................................................................................................................20

F.3. CHEMICAL TESTING PROGRAM AUDITS...........................................................................................................................20

F.4. DAPI PQS......................................................................................................................................................................20
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 6: DRUG AND ALCOHOL PROGRAM 

C6-iii 

G. LETTERS OF REGULATORY COMPLIANCE.............. 21

G.1. WHAT IS A LETTER OF REGULATORY COMPLIANCE (LORC)? .......................................................................................21

G.2. ARE LORC’S REQUIRED?...............................................................................................................................................21

G.3. HOW ARE LORC’S OBATINED? ......................................................................................................................................21
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: MARITIME PERSONNEL

CHAPTER 6: DRUG AND ALCOHOL PROGRAM 

C6-1 

A. DRUG AND ALCOHOL PROGRAM

A.1. INTRODUCTION This chapter describes and provides guidance on the Drug and Alcohol Program; it 

does not contain any enforcement guidance. See chapters C2, C3 and C4 for 

enforcement guidance. 

In 1988, the Coast Guard, in concert with other U. S. Department of 

Transportation (DOT) modal administrations, published regulations to prescribe the 

minimum standards, procedures, and means to be used to test for the use of 

dangerous drugs and alcohol in the marine industry. Title 46, Code of Federal 

Regulations, Parts 4 and 16 (46 CFR 4, 16) prescribe which commercial vessel 

crewmembers are required to be chemically tested and under what circumstances 

the testing must be done. The intent of the regulations is to provide a means to 

minimize the use of intoxicants by merchant marine personnel and to promote a 

drug free and safe work environment by deterring the illegal use of controlled 

substances. DOT has developed and published 49 CFR Part 40 regulations that 

describe in detail how Coast Guard-required drug tests are to be conducted.

A.2. CODE OF 

FEDERAL REGULATIONS 

(CFR) REFERENCES

- 46 CFR 16 : Chemical Testing: occasions for testing and procedures for the marine 

employer (when and who to test). 

- 49 CFR 40 : Procedures for Transportation Workplace Drug Testing Programs: 

procedures for all DOT-regulated drug testing, includes technical regulations for 

collection and testing (how to test and test results).

- 46 CFR 4.06 : Mandatory Chemical Testing Following Serious Marine Incidents 

Involving Vessels in Commercial Service: post casualty testing must be conducted to 

determine if drugs or alcohol were contributing factors in a serious marine incident 

(SMI). 

- 33 CFR 95 : Operating a Vessel While Under the Influence of Alcohol or a 

Dangerous Drug: sets the standard for alcohol intoxication and contains authority 

for chemical testing, primarily for alcohol. 

An Internet site with daily updates of the Code of Federal Regulations may be 

accessed at http://www.gpoaccess.gov/ecfr.

A.3. DEFINITIONS A.3.a. Merchant Mariners' Credentials (MMCs). 

Any license, Certificate of Registry (COR), or Merchant Mariner Document (MMD) 

issued by the Coast Guard which serves as the qualification document for all 

merchant mariners sailing on U.S. flag vessels. 

A.3.b. Serious Marine Incident (SMI) 

A SMI, as defined by 46 CFR 4.03-2, includes the following events: 

- A discharge of 10,000 gallons or more of oil into the navigable waters of the 

United States, whether or not resulting from a marine casualty, 

- A discharge of a reportable quantity of a hazardous substance into the navigable 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: MARITIME PERSONNEL

CHAPTER 6: DRUG AND ALCOHOL PROGRAM 

C6-2 

waters or into the environment of the United States, whether or not resulting from a 

marine casualty, or 

- A marine casualty or accident required to be reported to the Coast Guard,

involving a vessel in commercial service, and resulting in any of the following: 

 One or more deaths, 

 An injury to any person (including passengers) which requires professional 

medical treatment beyond first aid, and, in the case of a person employed on board 

a commercial vessel, which renders the person unable to perform routine vessel 

duties; 

 Damage to property in excess of $100,000; 

 Actual or constructive total loss of any inspected vessel; or 

 Actual or constructive total loss of any uninspected, self-propelled vessel of 100 

gross tons or more. 

46 CFR 16.105 A.3.c. Crewmember. 

A crewmember is an individual who is: 

- On board a vessel acting under the authority of their MMCs, whether or not the 

individual is a member of the vessel's crew; or 

- Engaged or employed on board a vessel owned in the United States that is

required by law or regulation to engage, employ, or be operated by an individual 

holding MMCs, except the following: 

 Individuals on fish processing vessels who are primarily employed in the 

preparation of fish or fish products, or in a support position, and who have no 

duties that directly affect the safe operation of the vessel; 

 Scientific personnel on an oceanographic research vessel; 

 Individuals on industrial vessels who are industrial personnel, as defined in 

46 CFR 90.10-15; and 

 Individuals not required under 46 CFR 15 who have no duties that directly affect 

the safe operation of the vessel. 

46 CFR 16.105 A.3.d. Operation. 

Operation means to navigate, steer, direct, manage, or sail a vessel, or to control, 

monitor, or maintain the vessel's main or auxiliary equipment or systems, which 

includes: 

- Determining the vessel's position, piloting, directing the vessel along a desired 

trackline, keeping account of the vessel's progress through the water, ordering or 

executing changes in course, rudder position, or speed, and maintaining a lookout; 

- Controlling, operating, monitoring, maintaining, or testing: the vessel's propulsion 

and steering systems; electric power generators; bilge, ballast, fire, and cargo pumps; 

deck machinery including winches, windlasses, and lifting equipment; lifesaving 

equipment and appliances; firefighting systems and equipment; and navigation and 

communication equipment; and 

- Mooring, anchoring, and line handling; loading or discharging of cargo or fuel; 

assembling or disassembling of tows; and maintaining the vessel's stability and 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: MARITIME PERSONNEL

CHAPTER 6: DRUG AND ALCOHOL PROGRAM 

C6-3 

watertight integrity. 

46 CFR 16.105 A.3.e. Marine Employer. 

Any one or more of the following may be considered a marine employer: 

Owner of a vessel; 

Managing operator; 

Charterer; 

Agent; 

Master; or 

Person in charge of the vessel. 

33 CFR 95.010 A.3.f. Law Enforcement Officer. 

A Coast Guard commissioned, warrant, or petty officer; or any other law 

enforcement officer authorized to obtain a chemical test under Federal, State, or 

local law. 

46 CFR 16.105 A.3.g. Medical Review Officer (MRO). 

A MRO is a licensed physician (medical doctor or doctor of osteopathy) responsible 

for receiving and reviewing SAMHSA accredited laboratory results generated by an 

employer’s drug testing program and evaluating medical explanations for certain 

drug test results. A MRO will be qualified in accordance with the requirements of 

49 CFR part 40. 

33 CFR 95.010 A.3.h. Intoxicant 

An intoxicant is any form of alcohol, dangerous drug, or combination thereof.

46 CFR 16.105 A.3.i. Dangerous Drug 

A narcotic drug, a controlled substance, or a controlled-substance analog (as defined 

in section 102 of the Comprehensive Drug Abuse and Control Act of 1970 (21 

U.S.C. 802)). 

46 CFR 16.105 A.3.j. Service Agent 

Any person or entity that provides services specified under this or 49 CFR Part 40 

to employers and/or crewmembers in connection with DOT drug testing and Coast 

Guard alcohol testing requirements. This includes, but is not limited to, collectors, 

laboratories, MROs, substance abuse professionals, and C/TPAs. To act as service 

agents, persons and organizations must meet the qualifications set forth in 

applicable sections of 49 CFR Part 40. Service agents are not employers for 

purposes of this part and cannot act as the Designated Employer Representative 

(DER). 

46 CFR 16.105 A.3.k. Consortium/Third Party Administrator (C/TPA) 

A service agent who provides or coordinates the provision of a variety of drug and 

alcohol testing services to employers. C/TPAs typically perform administrative tasks 

concerning the operation of the employers' drug and alcohol testing programs. This 

term includes, but is not limited to, groups of employers who join together to 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: MARITIME PERSONNEL

CHAPTER 6: DRUG AND ALCOHOL PROGRAM 

C6-4 

administer, as a single entity, the DOT drug testing programs for its members.

46 CFR 16.105 A.3.l. Sponsoring Organization 

Any company, consortium, corporation, association, union, or other organization 

with which individuals serving in the marine industry, or their employers, are 

associated. 

46 CFR 16.105 A.3.m. Refuse to Submit 

A refusal to take a drug test as set out in 49 CFR 40.191. 

49 CFR 40.3 A.3.n. Designated Employer Representative (DER) 

An employee authorized by the employer to take immediate action(s) to remove 

employees from safety-sensitive duties, or cause employees to be removed from 

these covered duties, and to make required decisions in the testing and evaluation 

processes. The DER also receives test results and other communications for the 

employer, consistent with the requirements of 49 CFR Part 40. Service agents 

cannot act as DERs. 

A.4.

APPLICABILITY

A.4.a. General 

Certain crewmembers are subject to the regulations of 46 CFR Part 16. If MMCs 

are required by at least one person on the vessel, then that person, and possibly 

more could be subject to the regulations based upon their safety sensitive position 

and responsibilities on the vessel. Each vessel must be evaluated independently 

using the definitions of "crewmember" and "operation" to determine personspecific applicability. With the exception of serious marine incident testing 

requirements, the regulations contained in 46 CFR Part 16 are not applicable to 

foreign flag vessels or those vessels that do not require licensed personnel. 

Examples of vessels where licensed personnel are not required (and therefore these 

regulations do not apply) are towing vessels under 26 feet in length and commercial 

fishing industry vessels under 200 gross tons. 

A.4.b. Safety Sensitive Positions 

In addition to the licensing requirement for enrollment in a chemical testing

program, the regulations require a marine employer to establish a chemical testing 

program for employees who occupy a safety sensitive position on a vessel. 

Crewmembers in a safety sensitive position include those who: 

- Occupy a position, or perform the duties and functions of a position required by 

the vessel’s Certificate of Inspection (COI); 

- Are required by law or regulation to hold a Coast Guard license to perform their 

duties; 

- Perform duties and functions directly related to the safe operation of the vessel; 

- Perform duties and functions of watchmen or patrolmen required by Coast Guard 

regulations; or 

- Are specifically assigned the duties of warning, mustering, assembling, assisting, or 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: MARITIME PERSONNEL

CHAPTER 6: DRUG AND ALCOHOL PROGRAM 

C6-5 

controlling the movement of passengers during emergencies. 

A crewmember in a safety sensitive position can also include individuals employed 

as bartenders, dealers, game operators and service personnel on vessels such as 

riverboat gambling casinos. These individuals shall be in a USCG chemical testing 

program if their duties include, but are not limited to, directing and mustering 

passengers in emergencies, passing out life jackets, or controlling, operating 

lifesaving/firefighting equipment. 

A.4.c. Fishing Industry Vessels 

Personnel employed on fishing industry vessels of less than 200 gross tons are not 

subject to the chemical testing regulations of 46 CFR 16 because these vessels are 

not required to be operated by individuals holding a Coast Guard-issued license. 

However, they are subject to the post SMI chemical testing required by 46 CFR 

4.06. Also, tankermen required by 46 CFR 105 on commercial fishing vessels 

dispensing petroleum products are subject to the chemical testing requirements of 

46 CFR 16 since they meet the definition of crewmember (see A.3.c. above). 

A.4.d. Marine Employer Financial Status 

The financial status of a marine employer, whether operating "for profit" or "not for 

profit" (i. e., charity), does not change the requirement for chemical testing. 

A.4.e. Employee Payment Status 

The payment status of an employee, whether he or she is a paid employee or serving 

as a volunteer, does not change the requirement for chemical testing if that person is 

a crewmember (see A.3.c. above). 

A.4.f. Uninspected Sailing School Vessels 

Students on board uninspected sailing school vessels technically meet the definition 

of crewmember due to their involvement in the operation of the vessel. However, 

their primary purpose on board is as paying passengers, who the regulations are 

intended to protect. Due to the instructional nature of the vessel's operation, the 

licensed operator is ultimately operating the vessel. Therefore, sailing school 

students are not subject to chemical testing requirements of 46 CFR 16. 

A.4.g. Cargo Handling Personnel On Unmanned Barges 

The regulations governing cargo handling (46 CFR 35-35 and 151.45-4) dictate the 

crew duty requirements for cargo transfer operations of unmanned barges. Both 

require that an individual with the proper license, MMD endorsement, or letter of 

designation (for subchapter O cargoes) be on duty to perform transfer operations. 

That individual is deemed to meet the definition of crewmember and is subject to 

the testing requirements of 46 CFR 16. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: MARITIME PERSONNEL

CHAPTER 6: DRUG AND ALCOHOL PROGRAM 

C6-6 

A.4.h. Foreign Nationals 

Crewmembers of foreign flag vessels while operating in U.S. waters are subject to 

the post SMI chemical testing requirements of 46 CFR 4.06. Foreign nationals who 

are employed on a U. S. flag vessel in a position which is required to undergo 

chemical testing are required to meet the requirements of 46 CFR 4.06 and 46 CFR 

Part 16. 

A.5. TESTING 

METHODOLOGY

A.5.a. Chemical Testing For Dangerous Drugs 

Chemical testing conducted under 46 CFR Parts 4 and 16 is limited to testing for 

five dangerous drugs or drug classes: marijuana, cocaine, opiates, amphetamines, 

and phencyclidine (PCP) only. All dangerous drug analysis is conducted on urine 

samples. Urine samples collected in order to meet the requirements of these 

regulations may not be tested for any other drugs. If an employer wants to test for 

additional drugs, or use a different cutoff level, the employer must keep such a 

program completely separate from the Coast Guard required program, including 

separate sample collections. 

A.5.b. Other DOT/Federal Agency Drug Tests 

Drug test taken under the authority of another DOT Operating Administration or 

another Federal Agency cannot be used to satisfy the requirements for a Coast 

Guard required drug and alcohol test program. Even though all DOT Operating 

Administrations use the same drug testing procedures (49 CFR 40), the 

requirements of a DOT Operating Administration or Federal Agency concerning 

when a test is required and procedures for handling test results oftentimes will

differ. 

There is one exception to this: If a credentialed person or credential applicant takes 

and passes a DOT or Federal Agency drug test within the past six months, that drug 

test result may be used ONLY for meeting the drug test requirement for 

credentialing (Periodic Test). 

A.5.c. Alcohol Testing 

The alcohol testing requirement in 46 CFR 4.06 and the alcohol testing authorized 

in 33 CFR 95 may be conducted using either blood, saliva or breath samples. 

If a blood sample is to be used, only a qualified medical person may collect the 

sample. The blood specimen is to be handled using established chain-ofcustody procedures. 

Saliva and breath testing devices must be capable of determining the presence of 

alcohol in a person’s system, must be used in accordance with the manufacturer’s 

procedures and must be currently listed on a Conforming Products List maintained 

by National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA). This testing may be 

conducted by anyone trained to perform such tests. The Coast Guard does not

mandate the use of Evidential Breath Testing devices. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: MARITIME PERSONNEL

CHAPTER 6: DRUG AND ALCOHOL PROGRAM 

C6-7 

A.6. COLLECTION 

REQUIREMENTS

A.6.a. Dangerous Drug Testing Specimens 

All dangerous drug analysis is conducted on urine specimens. Specimen collection 

requirements, such as who may collect urine specimens, collection procedures, and 

security precautions, are found in 49 CFR 40. 

Coast Guard personnel shall not under any circumstances, provide urine collection 

materials, or perform as the collection site person. Coast Guard personnel may 

suggest local sources for those materials and services. A listing of potential sites for 

post-accident specimen collection is available at http://homeport.uscg.mil/

Missions>Investigations>Drug and Alcohol Program “ Drug testing Service 

Providers”. There are additional commercial vendors available that can do drug and 

alcohol testing on a short notice requirement. 

The Department of Transportation (DOT) split sample procedures are mandatory 

for the maritime industry. Marine employers shall ensure the DOT split sample 

procedures are followed. Specimen handling, analysis, and reporting requirements 

are also discussed in 49 CFR 40. It is the responsibility of the marine employer to 

ensure that the collection of urine samples are conducted within 32 hours of a 

Serious Marine Incident (SMI) occurrence, unless precluded by safety concerns 

directly related to the incident. If safety concerns do not allow collection within 32 

hours, the collection must be completed as soon as the safety concerns have been 

addressed. If urine samples are not collected within 32 hours of the SMI or 

immediately after the safety concerns have been addressed, the reason why must be 

documented on form CG-2692B. 

46 CFR 4.06-3(a) A.6.b. Alcohol Testing Samples 

DOT alcohol testing procedures in 49 CFR part 40 are NOT applicable for the 

marine industry. Testing for the presence of alcohol may be conducted using blood, 

saliva or breath samples. If a blood sample is to be used, the sample is to be 

collected ONLY by a qualified medical person. A saliva or breath test can be 

conducted by an individual trained on how to perform the test. The timeliness of 

testing is especially important due to the rapid elimination of alcohol from the body. 

It is the responsibility of the marine employer to ensure that the alcohol tests are 

conducted within 2 hours of a SMI occurrence, unless precluded by safety concerns 

directly related to the incident. If safety concerns do not allow testing within 2 

hours, the testing must be completed as soon as the safety concerns have been 

addressed. Testing is not required to be conducted more than eight hours after the 

SMI and the reason why the testing was not conducted must be documented on 

form CG-2692B. Whenever possible, efforts can be made to ensure that a law 

enforcement officer conduct the alcohol test if such testing would be more timely 

than testing arranged by the marine employer, or if there is any concern that testing 

would not otherwise be accomplished.

A.7. LABORATORY 

ANALYSIS

Analysis of drug test specimens must be conducted at a Substance Abuse and 

Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) certified laboratory. A current 

list of laboratories that meet the minimum standards to engage in urine drug testing 

for federal agencies is listed in the Federal Register during the first week of every 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: MARITIME PERSONNEL

CHAPTER 6: DRUG AND ALCOHOL PROGRAM 

C6-8 

month under the Department of Health and Human Services category. Federal 

Registers may be accessed at http://www.gpoaccess.gov/fr/index.html. The list of 

laboratories will also be posted in the DAPI general information section of the Drug 

& Alcohol Program (DAPI) Community on CGCentral. 

A.8. EMPLOYEE 

RESPONSIBILITIES

Employees must provide a urine specimen for drug testing, and a blood or breath 

sample for alcohol testing, when directed by their marine employer or a law 

enforcement officer. An employee cannot be compelled to submit to drug or 

alcohol testing, however a refusal to test by an employee could subject the individual 

to suspension and revocation proceedings and/or civil penalty actions (see section E 

below for more info on refusals). 

B. MARINE EMPLOYER RESPONSIBILITIES

B.1. GENERAL The marine employer is responsible for establishing and administering a drug and 

alcohol testing program for their employees. The Coast Guard has developed a 

guide booklet to assist marine employers with complying with this requirement. 

This booklet may be viewed or downloaded at http://homeport.uscg.mil

Missions>Investigations>Drug and Alcohol Program “Marine Employers Drug 

Testing Guidance”. Failure, on the part of a marine employer, to implement a 

program or to conduct chemical testing for dangerous drugs or for evidence of 

alcohol subjects the employer to the civil penalty provisions of 46 U.S.C. Section 

2115. 33 CFR Part 27 provides the current maximum penalty which may be

assessed and the Statute provides that the penalty may be assessed per day for each 

violation and each day of a continuing violation constitutes a separate violation. 

B.2.

CONFIDENTIALITY

The marine employer will safeguard the confidentiality of the testing program and 

shall not release drug testing results or other personal information except to the 

person who was tested, to a third party that the tested person specifies in writing, to 

the Coast Guard, the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB), or upon being 

presented with a valid court order in a legal proceeding. 

B.3. EMPLOYEE 

ASSISTANCE PROGRAM 

(EAP) 

The marine employer must establish an Employee Assistance Program (EAP) that 

includes education and training programs on drug use for crewmembers and the 

employer’s supervisory personnel. Supervisors must receive at least 60 minutes of 

training. The education program, at a minimum, must include the display and 

distribution of: 

Information on drug use/abuse; 

The employer’s drug and alcohol policy; and 

The display of a community substance abuse hot-line telephone number for 

crewmember assistance. 

The training program, at a minimum, must include training on: 

The effects and consequences of drug and alcohol use on personal health, safety and 

the work environment; 

The behavioral indications of drug use/abuse; and 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: MARITIME PERSONNEL

CHAPTER 6: DRUG AND ALCOHOL PROGRAM 

C6-9 

The documentation of training completed by crewmembers and the employer’s 

supervisory personnel. 

B.4. REPORTING 

POSITIVE AND NON- NEGATIVE DRUG TESTS

B.4.a. Individuals With MMCs (Merchant Mariner 

Credentials) 

Current marine employers, potential employers and sponsoring organizations must 

make a written report to the Coast Guard of all positive drug tests results from any 

required testing of any individual with MMCs. Positive test results must be reported 

from both the present and prospective employers. The marine employer must make 

this report regardless of whether the individual was hired or not hired, and 

regardless of whether the position required the individual to have MMCs. Marine 

employers and sponsoring organizations should be encouraged to also report all 

non-negative results from any required tests and all positive results from any nonDOT test conducted. 

B.4.b. Individuals Without MMCs 

Marine employers are not required to report positive or non-negative preemployment or random drug test results to the Coast Guard for persons without 

MMCs. However, employers are prohibited from hiring or using these individuals 

to fill safety sensitive positions. Positive and non-negative post-SMI required 

chemical test results must be reported regardless of whether or not the individual 

has MMCs. 

B.5. REPORTING A 

REFUSAL TO TEST

46 CFR 4.06-5 

49 CFR 40.191

A crewmember that holds a MMC who refuses to provide a test sample should be 

reported to the nearest Coast Guard Sector or Activity for action to be taken in 

accordance with applicable laws and regulations. Any crewmember that refuses to 

provide a test sample, regardless of whether or not they possess MMCs must be 

removed from safety sensitive positions. 

A MRO report of a substituted and/or adulterated drug test specimen is considered 

a refusal to test. If a crewmember refuses to remain at a collection site to give an 

additional specimen when directed to do so by a collection agent, it will be 

considered a refusal to test. 

Guidance on appropriate actions to take against individuals that refuse to test can be 

found in section E below and personnel investigation guidance can be found in 

Chapter B.11 of this manual. 

B.6. MANAGEMENT 

INFORMATION SYSTEM 

(MIS) 

The marine employer must collect drug and alcohol testing program data for input 

to the Management Information System (MIS). This data is collected for each 

calendar year, January 1 to December 31, and must be submitted by March 15 of the 

following year to: 

Commandant (CG-545) 

United States Coast Guard 

2100 Second Street, S.W. 

Washington, DC 20593-0001 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: MARITIME PERSONNEL

CHAPTER 6: DRUG AND ALCOHOL PROGRAM 

C6-10 

The DOT MIS form and data can be submitted using the Internet at 

http://damis.dot.gov. A user name and password is required for submission and 

can be obtained from http://homeport.uscg.mil/ Missions>Investigations>Drug 

and Alcohol Program “Using the Department of Transportation Reporting 

Website”. 

The MIS form and its instructions are available at all Coast Guard Sectors and 

Activities, and can be downloaded or printed from the world wide web at from 

http://homeport.uscg.mil/ Missions>Investigations>Drug and Alcohol Program 

“DAPI Program Forms”.

Instructions for completing the form can also be found in 46 CFR 16.500. 

Forms may be submitted on behalf of a marine employer by a drug testing 

consortium or an employer representative. It is the employer’s responsibility to 

ensure that the data submitted is correct. 

Consortiums may submit one MIS form for their entire pool, provided a list of 

those marine employers and vessel identification numbers for each marine employer 

covered by the submitted MIS form is attached. 

B.7. SEASONAL 

EMPLOYEES

Marine employers must ensure seasonal employees who do not meet one of the preemployment testing exemptions (see C.1.a. below) are pre-employment tested upon 

their return each season. These employees shall be included as part of the random 

testing pool during the time they are in the actual employment of the company. If a 

marine employer wants to retain an individual as an unpaid employee during the 

"off-season" and that individual remains in the employer’s random testing pool and 

fully participates in any required testing, he/she can be treated as a "returning" 

employee when they return to the payroll and will not need to be pre-employment 

tested. The same would hold true for a seaman returning to the same company after 

an absence (i.e. vacation or normal time off from being part of a blue/gold crew) 

during which the seaman was still considered an employee of the company (i.e. still 

receiving medical and/or other benefits). Individuals changing positions or ships 

within a company's fleet are not considered "new hires" and do not need to be preemployment tested. 

B.8. SHARING 

CREWMEMBERS AND 

INDEPENDENT 

MARINERS

Many marine employers allow their employees to temporarily work for other marine 

operators. There are also many individuals who make themselves available for 

employment, particularly as deckhands on charter boat operations. In order to 

ensure that the chemical testing requirements are not compromised, marine 

employers who share crewmembers with another employer or hire independent 

mariners must ensure that the chemical testing rules are followed. These employers 

must: 

- Conduct pre-employment tests. These tests can be waived if the marine employer 

determines that an individual has been in a random testing program for 60 days 

within the previous 185 days and has not tested positive or refused to take a 

chemical test. This documentation is to be retained by each marine employer who 

hires this individual. 

- Ensure that serious marine incident testing and reasonable cause testing is 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: MARITIME PERSONNEL

CHAPTER 6: DRUG AND ALCOHOL PROGRAM 

C6-11 

conducted on any crewmember when required by the regulations. 

- Presently, there is nothing to prevent a charterboat operator from sharing crew 

members with another operator or from hiring independent consortium members as 

long as the chemical testing rules are followed. 

- Ensure that all employers of a “shared” crewmember are made aware of any 

positive test or refusal to test by the crewmember. 

B.9. CHECK OF 

EMPLOYEES’ DRUG AND 

ALCOHOL TESTING 

RECORD

B.9.a. Marine Employers requesting information 

49 CFR 40.25 requires a marine employer, after obtaining the employee’s (or 

potential employee) written consent, to request information on that individual from 

all DOT regulated employers who have employed the individual for any time during 

the previous 2 years. This applies only to employees seeking to be placed in a safety 

sensitive position (i.e., a new hire, an employee transferred into a safety sensitive 

position). If the individual will not provide their written consent, the marine 

employer may not place them in any safety sensitive position. Employers need to 

request the following information: 

Alcohol test with a result of .04 or higher alcohol concentration (for marine 

employers this will be non-DOT alcohol test results and should be identified as 

such.); 

- Verified positive drug test; 

- Refusals to be tested (including verified adulterated or substituted drug test 

results); 

- Other violations of DOT agency drug and alcohol testing and/or Coast Guard 

alcohol testing requirements; and 

- For employees who have violated a DOT drug and alcohol regulation, 

documentation of the employee’s successful completion of DOT return-to-duty 

requirements (including follow-up tests). If the previous employer does not have 

this information, the marine employer must seek to obtain this information from 

the employee. If there is a DOT alcohol violation that will occur as the result of 

being employed in a safety-sensitive position regulated by another DOT modal 

administration (e.g., FAA, FMCSA). If the alcohol violation was incurred under 

Coast Guard authority, the mariner must present evidence of completing the 

requirements of their Agreement by which they had their credential returned to 

them. 

- If feasible, this information must be obtained and reviewed before the employee is 

placed into a safety sensitive position. If not feasible, the information should be 

obtained and reviewed as soon as possible. However, this individual should not fill 

a safety sensitive position for a period of more than 30 days after the date the 

information was requested, unless the information has been obtained or a good faith 

effort to obtain the information has been made and documented. 

- The employer must also ask the employee whether they have tested positive, or 

refused to test, on any pre-employment drug test taken in conjunction with an 

application for a safety sensitive position, but not obtained, within the last 2 years. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: MARITIME PERSONNEL

CHAPTER 6: DRUG AND ALCOHOL PROGRAM 

C6-12 

B.9.a.1. Actions After Receiving Information 

If the marine employer receives information that the employee had violated a DOT 

agency drug and alcohol and/or a Coast Guard alcohol regulation, they must not 

use the employee in safety sensitive positions unless they have obtained information 

that the employee has subsequently complied with the DOT return-to-duty 

requirements for a DOT drug test violation and completed any Coast Guard

requirement for an alcohol violation. Also, if the employee admits to having had a 

positive test or a refusal to test, the employer may not use the employee in safety 

sensitive positions until and unless the employee documents successful completion 

of the return-to-duty requirements. See section D.3.a.for guidance on the DOT 

return-to-duty requirements. 

B.9.b. Marine Employers providing information 

Marine employers who are requested to provide information on previous employees 

must: 

- Ensure that they have received and reviewed the employee’s specific written 

consent (should be an original signature and not a facsimile); 

- Immediately release the requested information to the employer making the 

request; 

- Ensure that the information includes any of the requested information that was 

obtained from their request for information from previous employers; and 

- Release the information in any written form (e.g. fax, e-mail, letter) that ensures 

confidentiality. 

B.10. REQUIRED 

RECORDKEEPING

B.10.a. Positive Test Results and/or Test Refusals 

Marine employers are required to keep records of tests reported positive or test 

refusals by the MRO for a period of 5 years. 

B.10.b. Negative Test Results 

Marine employers are required to keep records of tests reported as negative or 

negative-dilute for at least 1 year. 

B.10.c. Pre-employment records 

Marine employers must have records that will demonstrate that an individual has 

passed a pre-employment test or has been subject to random testing in support of 

the pre-employment waiver requirements. 

B.10.d. Record of all testing performed 

Marine employers must have test records that indicate: 

The total number of individuals chemically tested annually for dangerous drugs in 

each of the categories of testing required; 

The number of individuals who tested positive and for what types of drugs; and 

The number of test refusals (Adulterated, substituted). 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: MARITIME PERSONNEL

CHAPTER 6: DRUG AND ALCOHOL PROGRAM 

C6-13 

B.10.e. Request for Employee Drug and Alcohol Testing 

Results 

Marine employers who have requested drug and alcohol test result information on 

employees must keep a written, confidential record of the information obtained or 

the good faith effort they made to obtain the information. These records must be 

kept for 3 years from the date the employee first performed in a safety sensitive 

position. 

B.10.f. Release of Employee Drug and Alcohol Testing 

Results 

Marine employers who have released drug and alcohol test result information on 

employees, in accordance with 49 CFR part 40.25, must keep a written record of the 

information released, including the date, the party to whom it was released and a 

summary of the information provided. 

C. OCCASIONS TO CONDUCT DRUG AND ALCOHOL TESTS

C.1. PREEMPLOYMENT

A crewmember must pass a chemical test for dangerous drugs before an employer 

may employ them. A prospective crewmember that submits a urine sample cannot 

be employed in a safety sensitive position until a verified negative test result is

received by the employer.

C.1.a. Pre-employment waivers 

An employer may waive a pre-employment test if the prospective employee has: 

Passed a chemical test for dangerous drugs within the previous six months with no 

subsequent positive tests or refusals to test during the remainder of the six month 

period; or 

Been subject to random testing for 60 days within the previous 185 days and did not 

fail or refuse to participate in chemical testing for dangerous drugs. "Being subject 

to random testing" does not mean the individual has to have actually been tested, 

but has been eligible to be tested. 

An employer is not required to exempt prospective employees from preemployment testing. 

C.2. PERIODIC Periodic tests are the responsibility of the individual mariner, not the marine 

employer, for transactions involving their MMCs. Drug test results must be 

submitted with their MMC application. The test results must be completed and 

dated not more than 185 days prior to the submission of the application. 

Mariner’s that can provide satisfactory evidence that they have passed a DOT 5-

panel drug test within the previous 6 months or provide evidence that during the 

previous 185 days they have been subject to random drug testing program for at 

least 60 days and have not failed nor refused to take any required drug test, do not 

have to submit drug test results with their application. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: MARITIME PERSONNEL

CHAPTER 6: DRUG AND ALCOHOL PROGRAM 

C6-14 

C.3. RANDOM Random, for purposes of the drug testing regulation, means that each crewmember 

has an equal chance of being selected each time random selections are made. The 

random selection must be by a valid scientific method. Random drug testing shall 

be unannounced, meaning there is no prior notice to the individual being test. 

When an individual has been notified of the requirement to take a random drug test, 

that individual must immediately comply with the notification to test. If the 

individual employee does not immediately comply, it can be considered a refusal to 

test. 

An employee’s chance of selection must continue throughout his or her 

employment. This means that the marine employer cannot allow periods when an 

employee is "free" from chance of selection, or allow high-risk/low-risk selection 

periods to exist. An employer may randomly select vessels, rather than individuals, 

testing all applicable crewmembers. 

The dates of testing must also be random. For example: randomly picking names 

each payday is not acceptable, because the date is predictable and the employees 

could "beat" the test. 

No other tests, such as post accident or pre-employment can be counted toward the 

required percentage for the random testing. Marine employers may form or 

otherwise use sponsoring organizations, or may use contractors, to conduct their 

random chemical testing program. 

C.3.a. Annual Rate 

Commandant will publish in the Federal Register the minimum annual percentage 

rate for random drug testing of covered crewmembers. The annual random drug 

testing rate has been set at 50% since 1988. However, the annual rate may be

adjusted based on data received through Management Information System (MIS). If 

data received for two consecutive calendar years indicates that the positive rate was 

less than 1.0 %, the random drug testing rate may be reduced to 25%. 

C.3.a.1. How To Determine The Number Of Tests 

Required 

The number of random tests conducted each year must be based on the number of 

employees employed by the marine employer to serve as crewmembers, not the 

number of billets on board the employer’s vessels. For example; if a marine 

employer employs 12 crewmembers throughout a year to fill 6 crewmember billets 

on board their vessel, the number of random tests required would be based on 12 

employees. Thus, using a required rate of 50%, 6 random tests would need to be 

conducted during that year. 

C.3.b. Program Requirements for inspected vessels 

A marine employer must establish a program for random drug testing of 

crewmembers on inspected vessels who: 

- Occupy a position, or perform the duties and functions of a position, required by 

the vessel's Certificate of Inspection; 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: MARITIME PERSONNEL

CHAPTER 6: DRUG AND ALCOHOL PROGRAM 

C6-15 

- Perform the duties and functions of patrolmen or watchmen required by Coast 

Guard regulations; or 

- Are specifically assigned the duties of warning, mustering, assembling, assisting, or 

controlling the movement of passengers during emergencies. 

C.3.c. Program requirements for uninspected vessels 

A marine employer must establish a program for random drug testing of 

crewmembers on uninspected vessels who: 

- Are required by law or regulation to hold a Coast Guard issued license to perform 

their duties; 

- Perform duties and functions directly related to the safe operation of the vessel; 

- Perform the duties and functions of patrolmen or watchmen required by Coast 

Guard regulations; or 

- Are specifically assigned the duties of warning, mustering, assembling, assisting, or 

controlling the movement of passengers during emergencies. 

C.4. REASONABLE 

CAUSE

C.4.a. Reasonable cause testing for dangerous drugs 

(46 CFR 16.250) 

A marine employer shall require any crewmember that is reasonably suspected of 

using a dangerous drug to be chemically tested for dangerous drugs. When the 

marine employer determines that reasonable cause to require a test exists, the 

individual must be informed of that fact and directed to provide a urine sample as 

soon as practicable. The evidence to support the establishment of reasonable cause, 

the direction given to the crewmember to provide a sample, and any refusal or other 

response should be documented. On vessels that are required to have an official 

ship's log, the above information shall be entered in the logbook. 

A reasonable cause drug test shall be done in accordance with 49 CFR Part 40. 

C.4.a.1. Definition of reasonably suspected 

Reasonably suspected or reasonable cause means a probability exists, based on some 

evidence, that a crewmember has used a dangerous drug. Generally, this should be 

based on direct observation of specific, contemporaneous physical, behavioral, or 

performance indicators of probable use. Where practicable, these observations 

should have been made by two persons in supervisory positions. Indicators include 

but are not limited to: 

- An individual's speech (slurred and incoherent), behavior (lack of coordination 

and balance), or appearance; 

- Drugs and drug paraphernalia in clothing and personal property, or concealed in 

staterooms or elsewhere; or 

- Smoke, breath and body odors. 

- Since illness, injury, or other factors, as well as drugs could cause these 

circumstances and conditions, the decision to test for reasonable cause must be 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: MARITIME PERSONNEL

CHAPTER 6: DRUG AND ALCOHOL PROGRAM 

C6-16 

made with prudence and common sense. 

C.4.b. Reasonable cause testing for intoxication (33 

CFR 95.035) 

These regulations apply to all vessels (commercial, recreational, domestic or foreign) 

on U. S. waters. Only a marine employer or a law enforcement officer may direct an 

individual operating a vessel to undergo a chemical test for evidence of drug or 

alcohol use. Reasonable cause exist when: 

- The individual was directly involved in the occurrence of a marine casualty; or 

- The individual is suspected of being intoxicated, which can be established by 

direct observation of the individual’s operation of any vessel and there is an 

apparent effect of the intoxicant(s) consumed by the individual on the person's 

manner, disposition, speech, muscular movement, general appearance or behavior. 

Where practicable, these observations should have been made by two persons. 

When the individual is directed to undergo a chemical test, the individual must be 

informed of that fact and directed to undergo a test as soon as practicable. 

Unlike mandatory chemical testing after a SMI, chemical tests are not automatically 

required whenever an individual is involved in a marine casualty. Good judgment 

and careful consideration of the seriousness and circumstances of a marine casualty 

shall be exercised before directing chemical testing. A chemical test for drugs 

directed under this authority should be conducted in accordance with 49 CFR 40. 

C.5. POST 

ACCIDENT

Post accident drug and alcohol testing regulations apply to all U.S. commercial 

vessels operating anywhere in the world and all foreign-flagged vessels operating 

upon the navigable waters of the U.S. 

C.5.a. Reportable marine casualties 

Following every marine casualty reportable to the Coast Guard under 46 CFR 4.05-

10 (i.e., Reportable Marine Casualties), the marine employer must determine 

whether there is any evidence of alcohol or drug use by the individuals directly 

involved. Such evidence may include chemical tests for drugs and alcohol. Any 

evidence must be preserved and reported to the Coast Guard. 

C.5.b. SMI or Probable SMI Casualties 

When a marine casualty occurs, the marine employer must make a timely, good faith 

determination as to whether the occurrence is or is likely to become a SMI. A 

marine employer shall require all persons engaged or employed on board the 

vessel(s) whom the employer determines to be directly involved to be chemically 

tested for dangerous drugs and alcohol. An individual whose order, action or failure 

to act is determined to have, or cannot be ruled out as, having caused or contributed 

to a SMI can be considered "directly involved". A law enforcement officer may also 

determine that a person was directly involved. If this happens, the marine employer 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: MARITIME PERSONNEL

CHAPTER 6: DRUG AND ALCOHOL PROGRAM 

C6-17 

shall then take all practicable steps to collect a sample. 

46 CFR 4.06-3 C.5.c. Collection timeframe 

Individuals ordered to be tested should not leave their duties in the aftermath of an 

incident when their performance is necessary to save lives or property, or to protect 

the environment. Individuals required to be tested are not to drink any beverage 

that contains alcohol, including mouthwashes until after the test has been conducted 

or after eight hours form the time of SMI. It is the responsibility of the marine 

employer to ensure that the alcohol tests are conducted within 2 hours and urine 

samples are collected within 32 hours of a SMI unless precluded by safety concerns 

directly related to the incident. If safety concerns do not allow testing within 2 

hours or collection of a urine sample within 32 hours, the testing/collection must be 

completed as soon as the safety concerns have been addressed. Alcohol testing is 

not required to be conducted more than eight hours after the SMI. Whenever 

possible, efforts can be made to ensure that a law enforcement officer conduct the 

alcohol test if such testing would be more timely than testing arranged by the marine 

employer, or if there is any concern that testing would not otherwise be 

accomplished. Marine employers are required to have the drug test specimens 

collected within 32 hours of the incident. If this is not possible, the drug test 

specimens should be collected as soon as possible after the incident. 

C.5.d. Post Accident Testing Reporting Requirements 

A Coast Guard form CG-2692B, Report of Required Chemical Drug and Alcohol 

Testing Following a Serious Marine Incident, must be submitted to the appropriate 

Officer in Charge, Marine Inspection following any serious marine incident. If 

alcohol tests cannot be conducted within 8 hours or urine samples are not collected 

within 32 hours of the SMI or immediately after the safety concerns have been 

addressed, the reason why must be documented on form CG-2692B. This form 

should be submitted with a form CG-2692, Report of Marine Accident, Injury or 

Death. All persons tested, regardless of citizenship, or whether or not they have 

MMCs shall be indicated on the CG-2692B. The drug test results will not always be 

available when the CG-2692 and CG-2692B are submitted, therefore the marine 

employer must report the test results, positive or negative, when they receive them. 

D. POSITIVE/NON-NEGATIVE DRUG AND ALCOHOL TESTS

D.1. POSITIVE 

DRUG TEST DEFINED

A positive drug test of a urine sample is a test result that a designated Medical 

Review Officer (MRO) verifies as positive for one or more drugs or drug classes. 

The marine employer must ensure that all test results are sent from the SAMHSA 

certified laboratory to the employer's designated MRO for verification. The 

verification process involves the MRO contacting the employee with the lab 

confirmed positive test and conducting an interview to determine if there is a 

legitimate explanation for the positive test. Only when the MRO verifies a person's 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: MARITIME PERSONNEL

CHAPTER 6: DRUG AND ALCOHOL PROGRAM 

C6-18 

confirmed positive test result from the lab and reports the test as positive to the 

marine employer has that person then failed the drug test. The MRO also reviews 

the chain-of-custody and other procedures to insure that there is no possibility of 

error or "mix-up". If there is a legitimate explanation or a possibility of error, the 

MRO will either cancel the test or downgrade it to a “negative test”. 

The use of marijuana for medicinal purposes, the ingestion of marijuana that has 

been added to prepared food products (i.e., brownies, pasta), or the passive 

inhalation of marijuana smoke or the environmental exposure or accidental ingestion 

of any drug or drug class is not a valid reason for the MRO to determine a negative 

test result. See 46 CFR 40.151. 

D.2. NON- NEGATIVE DRUG TEST 

DEFINED

A non-negative drug test of a urine sample is a test result that a designated Medical 

Review Officer (MRO) verifies as adulterated or substituted. These test results are 

to be considered a refusal to test and are a primary indication that the mariner has 

attempted to subvert the testing process. Adulterated is when an additive has been 

added to the urine specimen to “mask” the presence of a drug. Substituted is when 

the specific gravity and creatinine values are so low that the submitted specimen is 

considered not consistent with normal human urine. A substituted specimen can be 

the result of ingesting large quantities of fluids or using a liquid that will look like 

urine, i.e., apple juice, lemonade. 

The marine employer must ensure that all test results are sent from the SAMHSA 

certified laboratory to the employer's designated MRO for verification. The 

verification process involves the MRO contacting the employee with the lab 

confirmed adulterated or substituted test result and conducting an interview to 

determine if the is a legitimate explanation for the test result. Only when the MRO 

verifies a person's confirmed adulterated and/or substituted test result from the lab 

and reports the test as adulterated and/or substituted to the marine employer has 

that person then refused to take the drug test. The MRO also reviews the chain-ofcustody and other procedures to insure that there is no possibility of error or "mixup". If there is a legitimate explanation or a possibility of error, the MRO will either 

cancel the test or downgrade it to a “negative test”

D.3. REPORTS OF 

POSITIVE AND NON- NEGATIVE TESTS

Marine employers must report positive tests to the Coast Guard for persons holding 

MMCs. Additionally, marine employers must report any non-negative drug test 

results to Coast Guard for MMC holders. 

D.4. NEGATIVE –

DILUTE DRUG TEST 

REPORTS

On occasions, drug test will be reported as negative dilute by the MRO to the marine 

employer. When certain test level criteria (specific gravity and creatinine) are met, 

the MRO will direct the marine employer to send the individual immediately for 

another test using direct observation collection procedures. If the test report is 

negative dilute again, that will be the final test result. No further action is required to 

be taken. 

D.5.

CONSEQUENCES OF 

POSITIVE AND NONAny crewmember who fails any required drug test or has a drug test violation must 

be removed from duties which directly affect the safe operation of the vessel as soon 

as practicable (or denied employment in the case of a pre-employment test) 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: MARITIME PERSONNEL

CHAPTER 6: DRUG AND ALCOHOL PROGRAM 

C6-19 

NEGATIVE TEST until/unless the MRO determines that person is drug free and at low risk to return 

to drug use. This requirement applies to all persons who fail drug tests, whether or 

not they hold a MMC. In addition, the requirements given in 49 CFR part 40, 

subpart O must be complied with when returning to work. 

D.6. ALCOHOL 

TESTS THAT SHOW THE 

PRESENCE OF 

ALCOHOL. 

Alcohol tests that are performed with a breath testing device will show the presence 

of alcohol a level of 0.02 BAC or higher. The Coast Guard requires one of the 

following three specimen sources for an alcohol test: Blood, saliva and breath. 

Urine specimens that have been tested for alcohol are not acceptable. 

E. REFUSAL TO TEST

E.1. GENERAL The marine employer is responsible for assuring that drug and alcohol testing is 

done, but no individual can be forced to give a sample for chemical testing. In 

refusal cases, the individual’s refusal must be documented, and that person may be 

liable for a civil penalty and/or be subject to Coast Guard action against their 

MMCs for that refusal to test. 

E.1.a. Refusals by Individuals with MMCs 

Employees must provide a urine sample for drug testing, and a blood, saliva or 

breath sample for alcohol testing, when directed by their marine employer. An 

employee cannot be compelled to submit to drug or alcohol testing, however a 

refusal to test by an employee is considered misconduct. S&R proceedings and/or 

civil penalty actions should be taken against employees who refuse to test. 

E.1.b. Refusals by Individuals without MMCs 

Employees must provide a urine sample for drug testing, and a blood, saliva or 

breath sample for alcohol testing, when directed by their marine employer. An 

employee cannot be compelled to submit to drug or alcohol testing, however a 

refusal to test by an employee shall be reason for immediate removal of the 

employee from being employed in a safety-sensitive position. 

F. DRUG AND ALCOHOL PROGRAM INSPECTOR (DAPI) 

F.1. WHAT IS A 

DAPI? 

A Drug and Alcohol Program Inspector (DAPI) is a Coast Guard inspector whose 

primary focus is to increase compliance with the chemical testing requirements in the 

marine industry. 

A DAPI has two roles. First, they are to educate and assist marine employers in 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: MARITIME PERSONNEL

CHAPTER 6: DRUG AND ALCOHOL PROGRAM 

C6-20 

developing a compliant chemical testing program. Although it is unrealistic to expect 

a DAPI to visit each and every marine employer within his or her district, they are 

expected to respond to any questions or problems a marine employer might have. 

The DAPIs second role is to enforce the chemical testing regulations. DAPIs will 

conduct vessel inspections and visit marine employers within the District to ensure 

compliance with the chemical testing regulations. The scope of the inspections will 

include record keeping and reporting, specimen collection, Medical Review Officer 

activities, employee assistance programs, proper designation of crewmembers to be 

tested, and proper conduct of required tests. 

DAPI positions were established in the geographical center of the applicable vessel 

distribution in each district. The ports where DAPIs are located are Providence, 

Norfolk, Miami, New Orleans, St. Louis, Toledo, San Francisco Bay area, Portland 

(Oregon), Honolulu, and Anchorage. DAPIs are required to travel throughout each 

district, to create and foster an extensive outreach program. A DAPI can be assigned 

to either the local District office or District Sector Office. Due to the nature of the 

DAPI position, units with DAPIs should not assign the DAPI collateral duties or 

other responsibilities (e.g. morale officer).

F.2. DAPI

ENFORCEMENT TOOLS

DAPIs have several enforcement tools available to them in the event they encounter 

noncompliance. For inspected vessels, a DAPI may pull a vessel’s Certificate of 

Inspection or issue a civil penalty. For uninspected vessels, a DAPI may obtain a 

Captain of the Port Order, which prevents a vessel from operating. Civil penalties can 

also be issued to operators of uninspected vessels. Individuals refusing to participate 

in a chemical testing program can be issued civil penalties. Furthermore, holders of 

Coast Guard licenses or Merchant Mariner documents (MMDs) may be subject to 

suspension and revocation proceedings. 

F.3. CHEMICAL 

TESTING PROGRAM 

AUDITS

There are two checklists that have been developed for use by DAPIs and vessel 

inspectors. 

The first checklist is a simple five questions with minimal proof requirements being 

sought by a vessel inspector. The purpose is a simple compliance tool. If there are 

no apparent surface problems with the drug test program and other aspects of the 

vessel inspection, the drug test program audit may be considered complete. 

The second checklist is more detailed and is for use by a DAPI when doing a full 

audit of a marine employer’s drug and alcohol test program. This audit tool will be 

done when questions or concerns have arisen concerning compliance have been 

brought to the attention of Coast Guard. 

Both of these checklists are available on request from CG-545. 

F.4. DAPI PQS Newly assigned DAPIs will be required to complete a set of Program Qualification 

Standards (PQS). The PQS will focus on applicable laws and regulations pertaining to 

chemical testing as well as audits or inspections of a marine employer’s chemical 

testing program. 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: MARITIME PERSONNEL

CHAPTER 6: DRUG AND ALCOHOL PROGRAM 

C6-21 

While not a requirement, it is desirable that DAPIs have an Investigations background 

(e.g. complete Investigating Officer’s Course, obtain Investigator Qualifications). It is 

highly recommended that those individuals who are newly assigned to a DAPI billet 

and new to the Marine Safety program receive no less than 2 weeks OJT with a Coast 

Guard Inspector and 2 weeks with a Coast Guard Investigator. 

G. LETTERS OF REGULATORY COMPLIANCE

G.1. WHAT IS A 

LETTER OF 

REGULATORY 

COMPLIANCE 

(LORC)? 

A Letter of Regulatory Compliance (LORC) is a letter from Commandant (CG-545) 

that states that the Coast Guard has reviewed the drug and alcohol program for a 

marine employer, (or consortium), and that chemical testing policy meets the intent of 

the regulations set forth in the Coast Guard regulations found at 46 CFR parts 4 and 

16 and the DOT regulations found at 49 CFR part 40. An LORC is not a Coast 

Guard approval or endorsement for a company. It is a Coast Guard 

acknowledgement that the subject program has been reviewed and is not deficient in 

meeting the regulatory requirements and procedures. 

G.2. ARE 

LORC’S REQUIRED? 

A marine employer is not required to obtain an LORC. However, by obtaining 

an LORC, the drug and alcohol program audit performed annually by the Coast 

Guard will potentially go smoother for a marine employer. An inspector will not have 

to dedicate extensive time and energy auditing the drug and alcohol testing program 

because the Coast Guard (CG-545) has already reviewed the program and determined 

that it is not deficient in its form.

G.3. HOW ARE 

LORC’S OBATINED? 

The standards that a marine employer or a Consortia/Third Party Administrator 

(C/TPA) can be found at http://homeport.uscg.mil Missions>Investigations>Drug 

and Alcohol Program “Letters of Regulatory Compliance”. These standards are 

available in Word and Adobe format for download and completion. There are 

instructions on this site for completion of the standards. Regulatory text is not to be 

submitted but rather how shall a marine employer or C/TPA, in their language, will 

implement and operate their program is being sought. 

After a marine employer or consortium has developed a written drug and alcohol 

testing program, they should contact the local Coast Guard District Drug & Alcohol 

Program Inspector (DAPI). The DAPI contact information can be found at 

http://homeport.uscg.mil Missions>Investigations>Drug and Alcohol Program 

“Nationwide DPAI Program Contact Information”. The DAPIs should be able to 

guide marine employers during the development phase of their chemical testing 

program, as well as the reviewing stage. The DAPI can review the program locally to 

check for compliance with the regulations. Should some aspect of the program be 

deficient the local DAPI will work with the marine employer or consortium in making 

corrections. After the local DAPI has reviewed the program, it will be forwarded to 

Coast Guard Headquarters in Washington, DC for a final review. When the program 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: MARITIME PERSONNEL

CHAPTER 6: DRUG AND ALCOHOL PROGRAM 

C6-22 

is determined to be in compliance with the regulations, Commandant CG-545 will 

issue an LORC, which should be kept with their chemical testing program. 
USCG Marine Safety Manual 

Volume V: Investigations and Enforcement

PART C: ENFORCEMENT 

Chapter Seven: 

Criminal Enforcement
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 7: CRIMINAL ENFORCEMENT 

C7-i 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

A. CRIMINAL ENFORCEMENT PROCESS .................. 1

A.1. GENERAL .........................................................................................................................................................................1

A.2. POLICY AND PROCEDURAL OVERVIEW ............................................................................................................................1

B. RESPONSIBILITIES DURING CRIMINAL ENFORCEMENT 

PROCEDURES .................................... 2

B.1. MARINE SAFETY PERSONNEL...........................................................................................................................................2

B.2. SENIOR INVESTIGATING OFFICER (SIO) ...........................................................................................................................2

B.3. CAPTAIN OF THE PORT (COTP)/ OFFICER IN CHARGE, MARINE INSPECTION (OCMI)/ COMMANDING OFFICER ..............2

B.4. DISTRICT COMMANDER....................................................................................................................................................2

B.5. COAST GUARD INVESTIGATIVE SERVICE (CGIS).............................................................................................................2

B.6. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE.................................................................................................................................................3

B.7. FEDERAL/STATE AGENCIES..............................................................................................................................................3

B.8. ENVIRONMENTAL CRIMES TASK FORCES .........................................................................................................................4

C. MARINE INVESTIGATIONS........................ 4

C.1. GENERAL..........................................................................................................................................................................4
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 7: CRIMINAL ENFORCEMENT 

C7-1 

A. CRIMINAL ENFORCEMENT PROCESS

A.1. GENERAL This Chapter provides guidance for Marine Safety personnel conducting operations 

that may result in criminal enforcement and is intended to ensure a uniform process 

for all marine safety personnel to follow. All marine safety personnel that conduct 

field activities should be familiar with this policy. The Coast Guard is the primary 

federal agency responsible for the enforcement of laws and treaties of the U.S. on the 

high seas, in the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ), in coastal areas, and in and along 

the navigable waters of the U.S. Many of these laws provide for administrative, civil 

and criminal sanctions for violations of statutory requirements or implementing 

regulations. Some of these laws authorize criminal sanctions for negligent conduct, 

some require knowing or willful misconduct, and some establish strict criminal 

liability for violations. It is extremely important that investigations of potential 

violations of laws that conducted by marine safety personnel are performed in 

a manner that will protect all enforcement options. Marine safety units and 

personnel, should work in concert with the Department of Justice (DOJ) and other 

federal, state, and local agencies, to effectively use resources in support of any 

criminal prosecution in which the Coast Guard has jurisdiction. 

In addition to the guidance below the Maritime Law Enforcement Manual (MLEM), 

COMDTINSTR M16247.1D, Chapter 11, Vessel Safety; Appendix C, Statutory 

reference; and Appendix G ,Case Package Preparation provides guidance on criminal 

law enforcement. 

For specific guidance related to law enforcement procedures associated with marine 

pollution refer to Maritime Law Enforcement Manual (MLEM), COMDTINSTR 

M16247.1D, Chapter 9, Marine/Environmental Pollution Law Enforcement. 

A.2. POLICY AND 

PROCEDURAL 

OVERVIEW

Marine safety personnel actively enforce laws by detecting, investigating, and 

reporting violations of law. In general, the role of marine safety units and personnel 

is early detection and prompt reporting of potential violations so the cognizant 

District Commander can, in accordance with 33 C.F.R. § 1.07-90, determine whether 

to pursue referring the matter to the Department of Justice (DOJ) for criminal 

prosecution. While that determination sometimes needs to be made very quickly, it 

must nevertheless be based on a reasoned assessment of accurately transmitted facts 

and recommendations. Potential criminal violations should be reported without delay 

to ensure a proper investigation is conducted. District Commanders should ensure 

there is sufficient evidence of a suspected criminal violation prior to referring a case 

to DOJ. District legal staffs and the Coast Guard Investigative Service (CGIS) 

should be consulted and can assist with investigative resources, legal expertise, and 

liaison with federal prosecutors in evaluating each case and advising the District 

Commander on referring the case for prosecution. Although U.S. Attorneys do not 

need a referral from the Coast Guard to prosecute a case, the referral process 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 7: CRIMINAL ENFORCEMENT 

C7-2 

provides a standardized, Coast Guard-wide mechanism for bringing important cases 

to the attention of the appropriate U.S. Attorney. Additionally, since the U.S. 

Attorney does not require a Coast Guard referral to prosecute a case, the Coast 

Guard must act quickly to ensure the District Commander is prepared to respond 

favorably or unfavorably to the Department of Justice (DOJ) regarding the 

prosecution of potential criminal cases of which the Coast Guard has primary 

jurisdiction. 

B. RESPONSIBILITIES DURING CRIMINAL ENFORCEMENT 

PROCEDURES

B.1. MARINE 

SAFETY PERSONNEL

Marine safety personnel are the first line of defense against the violation of laws in 

the marine environment. As such they should be extremely familiar with this 

Chapter. 

B.2. SENIOR 

INVESTIGATING 

OFFICER (SIO) 

For all instances in which marine safety units and personnel detect potential criminal 

activity the Senior Investigating Officer (SIO) will coordinate communications 

between the unit, the District Commander, D(m) and D(l). The District Commander 

will interface with the Coast Guard Investigative Service. 

B.3. CAPTAIN OF 

THE PORT (COTP)/

OFFICER IN CHARGE,

MARINE INSPECTION 

(OCMI)/

COMMANDING OFFICER

In most cases the enforcement of laws over which the Coast Guard has jurisdiction is 

the responsibility of the Captain of the Port (COTP), Officer in Charge, Marine 

Inspection (OCMI), and/or Commanding Officers of Sectors and marine safety 

units. 

B.4. DISTRICT 

COMMANDER

 (1) Each District’s Prevention Division provides subject matter oversight and 

guidance on all marine safety and environmental protection issues. They are the link 

with higher Coast Guard authority on such issues and the supply source for any 

additional marine safety or environmental protection resources that may be required. 

(2) The District Legal Office is responsible for advising the District Commander on 

all criminal referrals, coordinating the District Commander’s referral of criminal cases 

to DOJ, and acting as the designated liaison point with DOJ for all referrals and 

litigation matters, and prosecuting all Class II civil penalties under the CWA. The 

Legal Office will advise on the sufficiency of evidence to meet the standard of proof 

beyond a reasonable doubt, on the elements of various offenses, and on restrictions 

on enforcement action under domestic and international law. The Legal Office will 

also provide guidance on an appropriate security in lieu of withholding customs 

clearance in all cases with significant potential for criminal referral. 

B.5. COAST GUARD 

INVESTIGATIVE 

SERVICE (CGIS) 

CGIS Agents work for the Commandant under the direction of the regional Special 

Agent in Charge. CGIS Agents are available to investigate criminal violations of all 

laws enforced by the Coast Guard. While CGIS agents do don’t directly exercise 14 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 7: CRIMINAL ENFORCEMENT 

C7-3 

USC 89(a) authority, they can assist uniformed personnel who pose that authority 

during a Coast Guard inspections, investigations or other boarding. The request for 

an agent’s services on a case should be made through a unit’s commanding officer. 

Oral requests should be followed by written confirmation. Where criminal activity is 

suspected, Commanding officers requesting CGIS services should also consult with 

the servicing District legal office. CGIS should be notified and consulted regarding 

all cases that may be referred to DOJ for criminal prosecution. CGIS Agents are 

trained criminal investigators who are familiar with the legal issues associated with the 

prosecution of a criminal case. Additionally, CGIS Agents regularly work with agents 

of other Federal, State, and local law enforcement agencies and frequently become 

aware of violations of environmental laws and ongoing criminal investigations 

through these sources. Frequently, after a case is accepted for prosecution, but 

before it goes to trial, the DOJ attorney prosecuting the case will require case 

investigation assistance in the form of service of grand jury subpoenas, further 

witness interrogation or other such follow-up. While it is often difficult for IO’s and 

inspectors to commit the time necessary to fulfill this need, a CGIS Agent can serve 

as “case agent” for DOJ Attorneys on Coast Guard investigations and have 

experience in performing this function. All unit commanders should keep in mind 

that, once a case is accepted for criminal investigation by CGIS, CGIS agents are 

required to follow procedures outlined in the CGIS Investigations Manual, 

COMDTINST M5527.1 (series), including procedures on briefing the chain of 

command on cases being investigated.

B.6. DEPARTMENT 

OF JUSTICE

DOJ makes the final decision on whether, and under what conditions, to prosecute 

criminal violations of marine safety and environmental laws. Primary responsibility 

for the approval and prosecution rests with the U.S. Attorney’s office in the judicial 

district in which the violation is alleged to have occurred. Criminal enforcement of 

marine environmental protection laws might also involve DOJ Environmental 

Crimes Section in Washington, DC, via an agreement with cognizant U.S. Attorney’s 

office. The effective investigation and successful prosecution of criminal cases often 

requires early consultation with DOJ. Consequently, it is imperative that all Coast 

Guard offices and units coordinate as soon as possible, through the District Legal 

Office, with the U.S. Attorney’s office. For any case which may result in referral to 

DOJ, consultation with the District Legal Office is required prior to any cooperative 

work with federal prosecutors in order to assure proper use of Coast Guard 

authorities. Such early consultations ensure coordination during rapidly developing 

investigations, help to develop consensus regarding the appropriate focus of 

investigative efforts, and avoid the unproductive use of investigative resources. To 

avoid potential 4th amendment suppression issues, DOJ should not be consulted on 

the specific facts of an investigation during a boarding by Coast Guard inspectors or 

investigators whereby they are exercising 14 USC 89a authority. 

B.7.

FEDERAL/STATE 

AGENCIES

Under 14 U.S.C. § 141(b), the Coast Guard is authorized to avail itself of officers, 

employees, advice, information and facilities of Federal, State or local government 

agencies as may be helpful in the performance of its duties. U.S. maritime law 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 7: CRIMINAL ENFORCEMENT 

C7-4 

enforcement efforts involve many agencies. Interagency coordination of effort has 

been established through Memorandums of Understanding, Memorandums of 

Agreement, and Interagency Agreements, and these documents are contained in 

Volume X of the MSM. Many states have significant environmental criminal 

enforcement programs and resources that can be utilized as additional sources of 

expertise and resources in dealing with criminal investigations of environmental law 

violations. Examples are forensic laboratories, HAZMAT testing, surveillance 

equipment, and so on. When State or local government personnel are utilized under 

the authority of 14 U.S.C. § 141(b), the Coast Guard is authorized to make payments 

for per diem and travel for these persons to the same extent prescribed for Federal 

employees. Coast Guard investigators should attempt to identify State and local 

environmental enforcement agencies, services and other resources that could assist in 

investigation of environmental violations. 

B.8.

ENVIRONMENTAL 

CRIMES TASK FORCES

Many U.S. Attorney offices and State law enforcement offices have formed 

Environmental Crimes Task Forces to address the problems inherent in coordinating 

enforcement actions by the numerous Federal, State and local law enforcement 

agencies that have jurisdiction over environmental crimes. The focus and makeup of 

these task forces differ depending on the individual U.S. Attorney or State agency 

that established the task force. Coast Guard participation in these task forces serve as 

a good means to inform other enforcement agencies of Coast Guard missions and 

interests in the environmental area, to establish a means of coordinating enforcement 

actions among agencies for major environmental cases, to identify resources and 

capabilities outside of the Coast Guard that may be useful in accomplishing Coast 

Guard missions, and to establish good working relationships among enforcement 

agencies and prosecuting attorneys involved in the enforcement of environmental 

laws. Task forces shall not be used as a referral process for Coast Guard cases. 

C. MARINE INVESTIGATIONS

C.1. GENERAL The Coast Guard conducts marine investigations under various legal authorities for a 

variety of purposes, including detection of administrative, civil, and criminal offenses, 

determination of causes, and creation of safety alerts and recommendations. These 

investigations begin with no presumption of criminal or civil misconduct. The results 

of any Coast Guard investigation, however, may be used as part of a criminal, civil or 

other enforcement action where such enforcement action is deemed appropriate and 

necessary. Because the criminal offenses involved may not be readily apparent at the 

outset, it is critical that all marine investigators (including pollution investigators) 

conduct their investigations in a fashion that will preserve the evidence and facts for 

use in a criminal setting. It is similarly critical that all marine investigators be 

conversant in the criminal offenses that the Coast Guard enforces. Where an 

apparent criminal offense is detected during the course of an investigation, marine 

investigators should seek the advice of their servicing legal office. Further, where 

Title 18, U.S. Code offenses are detected, marine investigators should seek the 
USCG MARINE SAFETY MANUAL, VOLUME V: INVESTIGATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT

PART C: ENFORCEMENT

CHAPTER 7: CRIMINAL ENFORCEMENT 

C7-5 

involvement of the CGIS through their District Commander. The SIO is 

responsible for all such coordination. 
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Appendix 


FORM # TITLE REV. DATE 

CG-705 Articles of Agreement 12/89 

CG-719B Application for Merchant 

Marine Document 

03/04 

CG-2636 Notice of Violation 06/04 

CG-2639A Answer Form 06/04 

CG-2639E Voluntary Surrender 

Agreement 

06/04 

CG-2639F Voluntary Deposit 

Agreement 

06/04 

CG-2639G Voluntary Deposit 

Agreement (Drug or 

Alcohol) 

06/04 

CG-2639I Good Faith Deposit 06/04 

CG-2692 Report of Marine Accident, 

Injury or Death 

06/04 

CG-2692A Barge Addendum 06/04 

CG-2692B Report of Required 

Chemical Drug and Alcohol 

Testing Following a Serious 

Marine Incident 

04/06 

CG-3865 Boating Accident Report N/A