DUI Guide for Merchant Mariners

Merchant mariners do not have a flat Coast Guard DUI bar

The first thing to fix is the myth: DUI/DWI does not appear in Table 1 to 46 CFR 10.211, so a California DUI arrest does not create a flat 3 year Coast Guard DUI bar for a Merchant Mariner Credential, and treating it as a fixed 3 year bar causes people to plan around a rule that does not actually exist in the regulation.

The myth is persistent and misleading.

Under 46 CFR 10.211, the United States Coast Guard reviews criminal records for a Merchant Mariner Credential, yet the regulation does not treat every offense the same way. Table 1 to 46 CFR 10.211 lists crimes with minimum and maximum assessment periods, and DUI/DWI is not on that table at all, which means the assessment for that kind of case is not tied to a pre-written DUI/DWI row. For a California mariner, that difference matters because the credential issue is federal and discretionary, not a fixed state certificate rule that simply turns on by calendar alone.

In Coast Guard practice, the conviction record under 46 CFR 10.211 still matters; it just is not evaluated with a listed DUI/DWI assessment period, because Table 1 does not list DUI/DWI, so there is no single schedule entry the credential evaluator is required to follow.

Table 1 to 46 CFR 10.211 is the starting point

Table 1 to 46 CFR 10.211 is where the Coast Guard lists offenses with minimum and maximum assessment periods for Merchant Mariner Credential applications, creating a framework that credential evaluators are expected to use. That table is not a California DMV chart, and it is not tied to ordinary California driver license rules; it is a federal credential chart that sits in its own regulatory system.

When an applicant has a conviction for an offense not listed in Table 1, 46 CFR 10.211 says the Coast Guard establishes an appropriate assessment period using the listed offenses as a guide, which is the discretionary part of the process. That wording does not mean the Coast Guard ignores DUI/DWI; it means there is no listed DUI/DWI row that automatically controls the assessment period, so someone has to make a judgment call by comparison.

No DUI/DWI row exists in Table 1.

Because of that gap, a mariner should be careful with internet advice copied from railroad, aviation, school bus, or ordinary California driver license pages. Those areas can have different reporting clocks and different certificate rules, and copying them onto a Merchant Mariner Credential can send the case in the wrong direction. For a Merchant Mariner Credential, the federal analysis begins with 46 CFR 10.211 and the Coast Guard's application disclosure process, not with a generic California timing chart.

Reckless driving gives the Coast Guard a 1 to 5 year guidepost

The nearest listed Table 1 offense to DUI/DWI is reckless driving, and reckless driving carries a 1 to 5 year assessment period under 46 CFR 10.211, which becomes the natural comparison point when the Coast Guard evaluates an unlisted alcohol case.

That guideline does not turn DUI/DWI into reckless driving, and it does not make every DUI/DWI a 1 year case or a 5 year case; the point is narrower, because when the offense is not listed, 46 CFR 10.211 tells the Coast Guard to use listed offenses as a guide, and reckless driving is the closest listed guidepost identified for DUI/DWI in that table structure.

This is where words on the final court record matter. A DUI conviction, a wet reckless under California Vehicle Code 23103.5, and a later dismissal under Penal Code 1203.4 do not read the same on paper, and they can be interpreted differently by a credential evaluator who is using reckless driving as a comparison point. The Coast Guard application process uses conviction disclosure, so the final disposition is not a side issue.

The record is the record.

A California mariner still has 10 DMV days

A California DUI arrest creates a separate California DMV deadline: the driver has 10 days from arrest to request a DMV administrative hearing, and that request date controls whether the driver even gets a hearing on the administrative suspension.

Nothing about the Coast Guard credential question pauses that 10 day California DMV deadline. The criminal case does not pause it either, so a mariner can be focused on a ship, a hitch, a port call, or a renewal date while the DMV clock still runs from the date of arrest in California, silently and automatically.

The clock is 10 days.

Requesting the California DMV administrative hearing within 10 days of arrest also allows the defense to obtain the DMV discovery packet on request, which is often the first place the stop and testing paperwork appears in one organized stack. That packet can matter because it gives an early look at the arrest paperwork, including the documents the DMV is using for the administrative action and any refusal allegation that might change the DMV suspension length.

I want that packet requested early in a mariner case because it helps separate the DMV issue from the Coast Guard issue under 46 CFR 10.211, so the team is not guessing about basic facts. They are connected by facts, but they are not the same proceeding.

The pink DS-367 covers the first 30 days

The pink California DMV DS-367 is a full, unrestricted California driver license for the 30 days it covers if the person's license was valid at arrest, and during that period it stands in for the plastic license that was taken.

Many drivers read the DS-367 and think they are already on a restricted license, or that they are limited to specific routes. They are not. During that 30 day period, the pink DS-367 functions as the full California license if the license was valid at arrest, and treating it as less than that can create needless transportation problems.

That 30 day period matters for a mariner who needs to drive to a union hall, a medical appointment, a port, or a court date in California, because those trips may all fall inside that window before any suspension begins. The DMV suspension period begins later, and California license restrictions and ignition interlock device requirements belong to the DMV suspension period that begins on day 31, not to the 30 day pink DS-367 period.

Day 31 is different.

Refusal does not cut down the DS-367 period

A chemical test refusal does not change the rule that the pink California DMV DS-367 functions as a full, unrestricted license during its 30 day period if the license was valid at arrest, regardless of how harsh the later DMV penalty might be.

This is a common point of confusion after a California DUI arrest. A refusal allegation can affect the DMV case, but it does not turn the first 30 days of the pink DS-367 into a restricted license, nor does it shorten that initial validity period; during those 30 days, the DS-367 is still a full, unrestricted California license if the person had a valid license at arrest.

The refusal does not shrink day one through day 30.

Restrictions and ignition interlock device requirements belong to the suspension period that starts on day 31. That timing is separate from the Merchant Mariner Credential analysis under 46 CFR 10.211 and separate from the Coast Guard disclosure form CG-719C, even though the same arrest triggered all of them.

The credential problem is CG-719C at application

For a Merchant Mariner Credential, the mariner-specific disclosure issue is the Coast Guard application disclosure, not the California DMV hearing request or the pink paper at the roadside. At the time of application, a Merchant Mariner Credential applicant must provide the Coast Guard written disclosure of all prior convictions not previously disclosed to the Coast Guard.

The Coast Guard form is CG-719C.

Form CG-719C is titled "Disclosure Statement for Narcotics, DWI/DUI, and/or Other Convictions." That title tells you why a California DUI case has to be handled with the later federal application record in mind, because the form is about conviction disclosure to the Coast Guard and names DWI/DUI right in the heading.

A California DUI arrest creates immediate California tasks, including the 10 day DMV hearing request and the 30 day DS-367 period. The Coast Guard application task is different, because it is tied to written disclosure of prior convictions not previously disclosed to the Coast Guard at the time of application, and it comes back around whenever the mariner has to renew or upgrade.

Do not mix those clocks.

Previously disclosed convictions are a separate category

The Coast Guard disclosure rule at application covers all prior convictions not previously disclosed to the Coast Guard, and that phrase matters on CG-719C because it separates a first disclosure from something already given to the Coast Guard in an earlier Merchant Mariner Credential application.

If a conviction has never been disclosed to the Coast Guard, the application disclosure issue is straightforward: the applicant must provide written disclosure at the time of application. If the conviction was previously disclosed, the rule is written differently, and the form still needs to be answered carefully so that the Coast Guard can see what has changed and what has not.

CG-719C is not a place for guessing.

I look at the final court disposition before treating the Coast Guard issue as settled, because 46 CFR 10.211 is built around convictions and assessment periods, not rumors or early charges. A pending California DUI arrest, a DUI conviction, and a Vehicle Code 23103.5 wet reckless create different records, and those records interact differently with Table 1. The Coast Guard application answer should match the actual record.

This is not the railroad or school bus timing problem

A California merchant mariner case is different from the railroad and school bus examples because the credential issue is federal and discretionary under 46 CFR 10.211, so it follows a different decision tree.

For mariners, I do not start with a 48 hour employer report model. I also do not treat the case as a California school bus certificate hearing, because those settings can have short employer-report clocks and specific state-driven standards that do not mirror the Coast Guard approach. The Merchant Mariner Credential issue runs through the United States Coast Guard, Table 1 to 46 CFR 10.211, and written conviction disclosure on CG-719C at application.

That distinction prevents bad early decisions.

Company policy may still matter to your job, and a vessel operator may have its own paperwork. But the mariner credential rule covered here is the Coast Guard rule, and the specific federal pieces are 46 CFR 10.211, Table 1, and CG-719C.

Court strategy should account for 46 CFR 10.211

The criminal case matters to the Coast Guard issue because 46 CFR 10.211 deals with convictions and assessment periods for Merchant Mariner Credential applications, and the criminal docket is where those convictions are created or avoided.

That is why the defense should not be built only around the first court appearance or the California DMV hearing. The DMV hearing request must be made within 10 days of arrest, and the DMV discovery packet can be requested after that, while the court case continues. At the same time, the criminal disposition can shape what later appears on CG-719C.

Both tracks need clean records.

For a mariner, I want the defense file to answer practical questions that can affect negotiations and later disclosure. What did the police report say? What did the DMV packet show? Was the final court result a DUI, a wet reckless under Vehicle Code 23103.5, or something else? Those are record questions, not slogans.

A sloppy plea can follow a mariner to the next Merchant Mariner Credential application. The Coast Guard does not list DUI/DWI in Table 1, but it still reviews criminal records under 46 CFR 10.211, and it can still compare an alcohol case to reckless driving. That is why the exact disposition matters.

Vehicle Code 23103.5 changes the name of the conviction

California Vehicle Code 23103.5 is the wet reckless statute.

A wet reckless is not the same label as a DUI/DWI in the California court file, and that difference is visible to anyone reading the abstract or docket. That can matter in a mariner case because DUI/DWI does not appear in Table 1 to 46 CFR 10.211, and the Coast Guard uses listed offenses as a guide for unlisted convictions, with reckless driving as the nearest listed Table 1 guidepost and a 1 to 5 year assessment period as the comparison range.

The label is not magic.

A Vehicle Code 23103.5 result still has to be disclosed when CG-719C requires disclosure of prior convictions not previously disclosed to the Coast Guard. The title of CG-719C includes "DWI/DUI, and/or Other Convictions," so reducing a DUI to a wet reckless does not mean the conviction disappears from the Coast Guard application process or becomes invisible to the evaluator.

Still, the final conviction name can change the conversation. A DUI conviction and a Vehicle Code 23103.5 conviction are not identical records, particularly when someone later compares them to Table 1. If the criminal facts support a reduction, the Coast Guard application consequences are one reason to pursue it carefully.

Record cleanup later uses Penal Code 1203.4

California Penal Code 1203.4 allows dismissal after successful completion of probation.

That relief comes later. It is not a substitute for requesting the DMV hearing within 10 days of arrest, and it does not change the fact that CG-719C asks for written disclosure of prior convictions not previously disclosed to the Coast Guard at the time of application, even if a later 1203.4 dismissal has been granted.

Penal Code 1203.4 has a place.

For a mariner, the timing is simple enough to keep straight. First comes the arrest and the 10 day California DMV deadline. Then the criminal case produces a disposition. If probation is completed successfully, Penal Code 1203.4 may allow a dismissal afterward, which is a separate step rather than a redo of the original case.

I do not treat Penal Code 1203.4 as a reason to ignore the earlier record. The Coast Guard reviews criminal records under 46 CFR 10.211, and CG-719C is a disclosure form for narcotics, DWI/DUI, and other convictions. The earlier criminal result still needs to be understood before any later application answer is prepared.

The DMV packet can help before the first court date

Requesting the California DMV administrative hearing within 10 days of arrest allows the defense to obtain the DMV discovery packet on request.

That packet is useful in a mariner case because it can arrive early enough to shape the first decisions, instead of having everyone guess about what the officer wrote. It may include the DS-367 paperwork and the officer's DMV materials, and I want those records before anyone makes assumptions about the stop, the arrest, the testing, or the refusal allegation.

Early paperwork beats memory.

The DMV packet is not the Coast Guard file. It is not CG-719C. But it can help show what the California side of the case is built on, and the California side can affect the final conviction that later has to be addressed under 46 CFR 10.211.

The sequence I use for a California mariner

In the first 10 days after a California DUI arrest, I treat the DMV hearing request as the first fixed deadline because the California DMV gives the driver 10 days from arrest to request the administrative hearing, and nothing on the Coast Guard side changes that limit.

After that, I want the DMV discovery packet requested. I also want the DS-367 calendar marked correctly: the pink DS-367 is a full, unrestricted California license for the 30 days it covers if the license was valid at arrest, refusal allegation included, so transportation planning during that span can be realistic instead of panicked.

Then I separate the Coast Guard issue. The United States Coast Guard reviews criminal records for a Merchant Mariner Credential under 46 CFR 10.211, DUI/DWI is not in Table 1, and reckless driving is the nearest listed guidepost, with a 1 to 5 year assessment period that can influence how an alcohol case is viewed.

Last, I line up the application issue. At the time of application, a Merchant Mariner Credential applicant must provide written disclosure to the Coast Guard of all prior convictions not previously disclosed to the Coast Guard, using CG-719C for those conviction disclosures so that the file is complete.

The useful order is this:

• Within 10 days of the California arrest, request the DMV administrative hearing.
• After the DMV hearing request, request the DMV discovery packet.
• Use the 30 day DS-367 period correctly if the license was valid at arrest.
• Defend the criminal case with 46 CFR 10.211 and CG-719C in mind.
• At the next Merchant Mariner Credential application, answer CG-719C based on the actual conviction record.

That order keeps the California DMV deadline, the 30 day DS-367 period, the criminal disposition, and the Coast Guard application disclosure in their proper lanes, so none of them is sacrificed by accident while the others get attention.