-3-

Taxi and Limousine Comm’n v. Ega

OATH Index No. 637/08 (Oct. 16, 2007)

Respondent failed to appear for the hearing and was declared in default. Petitioner proved that respondent tested positive for the presence of cocaine in his system. Revocation of respondent’s hack license recommended.

______

NEW YORK CITY OFFICE OF

ADMINISTRATIVE TRIALS AND HEARINGS

In the Matter of

TAXI AND LIMOUSINE COMMISSION

Petitioner

- against -

CHARLES EGA

Respondent

______

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

JULIO RODRIGUEZ, Administrative Law Judge

This license revocation proceeding was referred by petitioner, the Taxi and Limousine Commission (“Commission”), pursuant to the New York City Administrative Code and the Commission’s Taxicab Drivers Rules. Respondent Charles Ega, a licensed taxicab driver, is charged with being unfit to maintain his hack license based on the results of a drug test that revealed the presence of cocaine in respondent’s system.

A hearing was scheduled for September 26, 2007, to determine respondent’s fitness to maintain his taxicab license, pursuant to Commission rule 8-15 and Administrative Code section 19-512.1 (ALJ Ex. 1). Upon respondent’s failure to appear, petitioner submitted proof of service on respondent of the petition and notice of suspension and hearing at the address respondent provided to the Commission (Pet. Exs. 1, 2). The evidence suffices to find respondent in default and the hearing proceeded in the form of an inquest.

Based on petitioner’s documentary evidence, I find respondent guilty as charged and recommend revocation of his hack license.

ANALYSIS

Taxi and Limousine Commission Rule 2-19 states in relevant part:

(b)(1) …[E]ach licensee…shall be tested annually, at the licensee’s expense, for drugs or controlled substances, as set forth in § 3306 of the Public Health Law…(2) If the results of said test are positive, the driver’s license may be revoked after a hearing in accordance with §8-15 of this title.

35 RCNY § 2-19(b)(2) (LEXIS 2007).

The uncontested evidence established that on August 30, 2007, respondent supplied a urine sample to Laboratory Corporation of America Holdings (“LabCorp”) for testing. The Chain of Custody Form identifies respondent as the donor of the specimen by listing hack license 5054226, which Commission records show belongs to respondent. The form also bears the printed and signed name Charles Ega. The donor’s identity was verified via his New York State Driver’s License (Pet. Ex. 3)

The Affidavit of Kamlesh Patel, a toxicologist employed by LabCorp, sworn to on September 24, 2007, established that LabCorp tested the urine specimen supplied by respondent. The test results revealed that the sample contained 165 nanograms per milliliter of cocaine metabolite, above the cut-off level of 150 nanograms per milliliter established by federal government drug test guidelines and invoked by the Commission (Pet. Exs. 1, 3). Public Health Law section 3306 includes cocaine as a controlled substance. Pub. Health Law § 3306, Schedule II(b)(4) (LEXIS 2007).

FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS

1.  Petitioner proved that respondent’s urine sample tested positive for the presence of cocaine metabolite, a controlled substance, in the amount of 165 nanograms per milliliter, in excess of the 150 nanograms per milliliter cutoff established by federal government drug test guidelines and invoked by the Commission.

2.  Respondent is unfit to hold taxicab license number 5054226 and poses a threat to public safety.

RECOMMENDATION

The Commission is seeking the revocation of respondent’s taxicab license. Commission rule 2-19(b)(2), authorizes the revocation of a driver’s hack license, after a hearing, when a driver tests positive on his/her annual drug test. See 35 RCNY §§ 2-19(b)(2) and 8-15 (LEXIS 2007). The ingestion of cocaine undoubtedly is incompatible with driving a taxicab. In so doing, respondent poses a threat to public safety and is unfit to maintain his Commission license. Accordingly, pursuant to Commission rules 2-19 and 8-15 and Administrative Code section 19-512.1, I recommend that the Commission revoke respondent’s license.

Julio Rodriguez

Administrative Law Judge

October 16, 2007

SUBMITTED TO:

MATTHEW W. DAUS

Commissioner

APPEARANCES:

MARC T. HARDEKOPF, ESQ.

Attorney for Petitioner

No Appearance by or for respondent.