UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

UNITED STATES COAST GUARI)

L]NITED STATES COAST GUARD

Complainant

il

MURLEY DILLON

Respondent

Docket Number 2023-0058

Enforcement Activity No. 7620849

ORDER MEMORIALIZING PREHEARING CONFERENCE AND CONSENT ORDER

Issued: March 13. 2023

Bv Administrative Law Judqe: Honorable Timothv G. Stueve

Appearances:

fuchard Wells

USCG Sector New Orleans

For the Coast Guard

Murley Dillon, Pro Se

For Respondent
This matter comes before me on the united States coast cuard,s (Coast Guard) Motion for Approvar of Settlement Agreement and Entry of consent order (Motion). on February 16, 2023' the coast Guard issued a compraint alleging Murley Diron (Respondent) committed

misconduct by refusing to take a drug test as described by 46 U.S.C. g 7703(lXB). After the

parties entered into a proposed Settrement Agreement, the coast Guard filed the Motion

requesting I issue a Consent Order

On March 7, 2023,I convened a telephonic prehearing conference with the parties.

Richard we's appeared on behalf of the coast Guard. Murley Dillon (Respondent) appeared on

his own behalf. I exprained to the parties that after a review ofthe file, I do not find the

Settlement Agreement to be consistent with the cure criteria set forth in SWE ENEY

Specifically, line 7 of paragraph 6 in the coast Guard,s Motion states that Respondent,s

Merchant Mariner Credential (MMC) will be suspended for 24 months if Respondent ..fails 

a test

or refuses to submit to a test." 46 C.F.R. $ 5.569 indicates that the only appropriate sanction

when a Respondent is found to be using dangerous drugs is revocation. The Coast Guard may

impose a sanction ofa 24-month suspension ifRespondent refuses to submit to a test, but not if

Respondent fails a test. I have a duty under 33 C.F.R. $ 20.502 to ensure the Settlement

Agreement is lawful. See The Interim Final Rule on Rules ofPractice, Procedure, and Evidence

forAdministrativeProceedingsoftheCoastGuard,64Fed.Reg.,pp.28058-28059(1999).tThat

said, I was unable approve the Settlement Agreement as it was written.

I Section 20.502 Settlements.

Comment: One writer would like to know whether an ALJ can reJect a proposed settlement, even ifagreed to by the

parties?

Response: Under $20.502(b) any motion for proposed settlement must include the reasons why the ALJ should

accept it. The ALJ will review such a settlement for the following information:

(l) Did the appropriate parties sign the agreement'l

(2) Does the complaint allege sufficient facts?

(3) Does the govemment havejurisdiction over the respondent?
Also briefly discussed were absent signatures from the Complaint and its Certificate of

Service, and an incorrect name listed on the Return of Service for the Complaint. The Coast

Guard indicated they would submit a corrected Settlement Agreement, as well as a copy of the

Complaint with signatures and its Retum of Service with the proper name.

On or about March 10,2023, the parties in this case submitted a revised settlement

agreement and Amended Motion for Approval of Settlement Agreement and Entry of Consent

Order to be approved as a settlement of the case under 33 C.F.R. S 20.502. Also submitted were

a copy ofthe signed Complaint and a Return of Service with Respondent's name.2

I have carefully reviewed the terms of the Settlement Agreement and hnd it is fair and

reasonable and in substantial compliance with the requirements of 33 C.F.R. $ 20.502.

ORDER

Upon consideration of the record, it is hereby OR-DERED, the Settlement Agreement is

APPROVED in full and incorporated herein by reference. This Consent Order shall constitute

full, final, and complete adjudication ofthis proceeding.

Done and dated March 13,243, at

Alameda, Calilomia

Timothy G. Stueve

Administrative Law Judge

U.S. Coast Guard

(4) Does the law permit the order?

(For example, on convictions in dangerous-drug cases, the statute mandat€s revocation of mariners' licenses. The

parties may not agr€e to rehabilitation in these cases.)

(5) Is the settlement fair under the circumstances?

(6) Is the settlement clear?

2 I note that the submitted Complaint's Retum ofService has a digital signature with a date of March 8, 2023, but a

listed date as February 16, 2023. I am considering the February 16, 2023 date to be correct.