UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

UNITED STATES COAST GUARI)

UNITED STATES COAST GUARD

Complainant

VS

JOHN WILLIAM POWELL

Respondent

Docket Number 2023-0053

Enforcement Activity No. 7636249

DEFAULT ORDER

Issued: July 17,2023

By Administrative Law Judge: Honorable George J. Jordan

Appearances:

Paul Lonardo

USCG Sector Houston/Galveston

For the Coast Guard

John William Powell, Pro se

For the Respondent

7
ORDER GRANTING COAST GUARD'S MOTION FOR DET'AULT ORDER

On February 14,2023, the United States Coast Guard (Coast Guard) issued a Complaint

against John William Powell (Respondent) seeking to revoke his Merchant Mariner Credential

(MMC) for use of, or addiction to the use of dangerous drugs pursuant to 46 U.S.C $7704(b) and

46 C.F.R. 5.35. Specifically, the Coast Guard alleges that on February 11,2022, the Respondent

took a required pre-employrnent drug test pursuant to 46 C.F.R. Part 16. A urine specimor was

collected from Respondent by Lauren Franklin ofSoutheast Texas Oocupational Medical in

Beaumont, Texas in accordance with 49 C.F.R Part 40. Respondent signed a Federal Drug

Testing Custody and Control Form for providing urine specimen ID # 673 0349. Urine specimen

lD # 6730349 was received by and analyzed pursuant to 49 C.F.R. Part 40 by Quest Diagnostics

Laboratory in Lenexa, Kansas, a certified SAMHSA laboratory. On February 17,2O22, uine

specimen lD # 6730349 tested positive for Amphetamine and Methamphetamine as reported by

Quest Diagnostics Laboratory. On February 28, 2022, Dr. Dana Carasig, the Medical Review

Officer, determined that Respondent failed a chemical test for dangerous drugs. Respondent has

been the user ofa dangerous drugs, raising the presumption ofuse established by 46 C.F.R $

16.201(b). Respondent has been the user ofa dangerous drug as described by 46 U.S.C. $

7704(b).

The Coast Guard filed its Retum of Service for Complaint on February 21,2023,

indicating it served a copy ofsaid Complaint to Respondent's residenoe by express courier

service. The document was delivered to Respondent's residence where a person of suitable age

and discretion signed ior the document on February 16,2023. As set forth in the Complaint,

Respondent's Answer is due within 20 days ofreceipt in accordance with 33 C.F.R. g 20.308(a).

Respondent's Answer was due no later than March 8, 2023.

2
To date, Respondent has neither filed an Answer nor requested an extension of time to

file an Answer; therefore, the Coast Guard filed its Motion for Default Order (Default Motion)

on May 19, 2023, requesting the Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) issue a Default Order against

Respondent imposing the sanction of revocation against Respondent's MMC. The Coast Guard

subsequently filed a Retum of Service for the Default Motion indicating it served a copy of said

Default Motion to Respondent's residence by express courier service, where a person ofsuitable

age and discretion signed for the document on May 22,2023.

Title 33 C.F.R. $ 20.310(b) provides "the respondent alleged to be in default shall file a

reply to the motion 20 days or less after service of the motion." Respondent's reply was due no

later than June 12,20231. To date, Respondent has not filed his reply.

On June 20, 2023, the ALJ Docketing Center assigned this matter to me for review and

adjudication. I have carefully reviewed this file, and find that the applicable provisions of33

C.F.R. $$ 20.310 and 20.304(d) and (h) have been complied with, and Respondent is in

DEFAULT. Under 33 C.F.R. $ 20.310(c), a default constitutes an admission of all facts alleged

in the Complaint and a waiver ofRespondent's right to a hearing.

Accordingly, I find the violations alleged in the Complaint are PROVED. I have

carefully reviewed the Complaint and the Default Motion and further find the proposed sanction

ofrevocation is appropriate rurder the provisions of46 C.F.R. $ 5.569.

r The actual due date was June I l, 2023, which fell on a Sunday. The next business day was Monday, June 12,

2023. 33 C.F.R. $ 20.306(a)(2).

3
4

SANCTION

IT lS HEREBY ORDERED that Respondent John William Powell' Merchan Mariner

Credential is REVOKED.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Rcspondent immediately his MM to the

Investigating Officer at the United States Coast Guard, Sector Houston/Galv ton, Inv

Division, 1341 I Hillard Street, Houston, TX 77034-5635. If Respondent to

use his MMC, he may be subject to criminal prosecution.

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that under 33 C.F.R. $ 20.3 l0(e), for good cause

Administratir,e Law Judge may set aside this finding of Default. may file motion

to set aside the finding with the ALJ Docketing Center, Baltimore, MD.

PLEASE TAKE FURTHER NOTICE that service of this Order

serves to notifo Respondent ofhis right to appeal as set forth in 33 C.F.R. $$ 20.1001 - .1004.

(Attachment A).

Done and dated July 17. 2023.

Seattle, Washington

George J. Jordan

Administrative Law Judge

United States Coast Guard

an

-4/4'^
ORDER GRANTING COAST GUARD'S MOTION FOR DEFAULT ORDER

On February 14,2023, the United States Coast Guard (Coast Guard) issued a Complaint

against John William Powell (Respondent) seeking to revoke his Merchant Mariner Credential

(MMC) for use of, or addiction to the use of dangerous drugs pursuant to 46 U.S.C $7704(b) and

46 C.F.R. 5.3 5. Specifically, the Coast Guard alleges that on February 11,2022, the Respondent

took a required pre-employment drug test pursuant to 46 C.F.R. Part 16. A urine specimen was

collected from Respondent by Lauren Franklin of Southeast Texas Occupational Medical in

Beaumont, Texas in accordance with 49 C.F.R Part 40. Respondent signed a Federal Drug

Testing Custody and Control Form for providing urine specimen ID # 6730349. Urine specimen

ID # 6730349 was received by and analyzed pursuant to 49 C.F.R. Parl 40 by Quest Diagnostics

Laboratory in Lenexa, Kansas, a certified SAMHSA laboratory. On F ebruary 17,2022, uine

specimen lD # 6730349 tested positive for Amphetamine and Methamphetamine as reported by

Quest Diagnostics Laboratory. On February 28, 2O22, Dr. Dana Carasig, the Medical Review

Officer, determined that Respondent failed a chemical test for dangerous drugs. Respondent has

been the user of a dangerous drugs, raising the presumption ofuse established by 46 C.F.R $

16.201(b). Respondent has been the user ofa dangerous drug as described by 46 U.S.C. $

7704(b).

The Coast Guard filed its Retum of Service for Complaint on February 21, 2023,

indicating it served a copy ofsaid Complaint to Respondent's residence by express courier

service. The document was delivered to Respondent's residence where a person of suitabie age

and discretion signed for the document on February 16,2023. As set forlh in the Complaint,

Respondent's Answer is due within 20 days ofreceipt in accordance with 33 C.F.R. $ 20.308(a).

Respondent's Answer was due no later than March 8, 2023.

2