COAST GUARD: Administrative Law Judge Program Contains Elements Designed to Foster Judges’ Independence and Mariner Protections Assessed are Being Followed (GAO-09-489).
This report was requested by several congressional committees (see p.26) in the wake of a July 2007 Baltimore Sun article entitled "Coast Guard denies allegations of bias in judicial process." The report can be accessed via the GAO website at www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-09-489 The report focused on three issues:
— First, GAO reviewed the ALJ programs’ structure and the extent that this fostered the independence of judges. In general, we found that the structure called for by Congress in the Administrative Procedures Act (APA) and related Office of Personnel Management (OPM) guidelines — which were designed to foster independence — were indeed contained in the Coast Guard’s program. As part of this objective, GAO reviewed personnel files and verified that the Coast Guard ALJ’s were hired and paid under OPM regulations.
— Second, GAO reviewed the ALJ programs’ procedures and the extent they included protections for mariners and whether complaints and decisions contained certain items related to this. GAO found that the program did include protections for mariners — such as rights to submit and review evidence, to have a hearing before a judge, to be represented by counsel, and to appeal the case. In addition, GAO reviewed a projectable sample of almost 200 individual case files over a 3 year period and found that virtually all the complaints and decisions did include the required item — such as listing the rule violated and alleged facts, stating the findings of fact, the decision and order, and the right to appeal.
— Third, GAO reviewed the outcomes of cases, based on a review of more than a thousand individual case files over a 3 year period. The majority of cases (62%) are settled through negotiation between the Coast Guard and mariners without a hearing. Only a small amount of cases (3%) go before an ALJ for a decision and order. Other outcomes include default (11%) where a mariner does not respond to the charges; withdrawal (9%) where the Coast Guard withdraws the charges; voluntary surrender (9%) where the mariner gives up their license; and admissions (7%) where the mariner admits the allegation.
The report also compares the Coast Guard ALJ program with 3 other federal ALJ programs that hear cases related to the possible suspension and revocation of credentials required for employment a particular field. Specifically, appendix I compares Coast Guard to the USDA, SEC and NTSB. Because statute requires minimum procedures for these adjudications, each of these agencies is similar. As part of this review, GAO also conducted outreach to several mariners associations and attorneys to obtain their perspectives on Coast Guard ALJ structure and procedures, administrative actions, and ALJ hearing processes. Because the input GAO received was varied and did not have a consistent message, GAO was not able to draw any conclusions from their input that would allow GAO to characterize mariner views in general. The report and appendices provides a great deal of detailed information on the ALJ program and process (including case outcomes).
See also – Report: Coast Guard law system serves mariners justice.