Lowell E. Hansen v. Energy West Mining Company (Board decision, August 14, 2026)
Hansen v. Energy West Mining (BRB 26-0118): Employer withdraws appeal and must pay benefits
Apply this to your situation
This order from 2026 bound only the parties to this case; it isn't precedent. Ask about your situation and see what the current statutes and regulations the Board applies and Board precedent say, with citations.
BRB final decision. The Benefits Review Board dismissed the employer's appeal after it withdrew its challenge and directed payment of benefits. Under 20 C.F.R. § 802.406, a Board decision becomes final 60 days after issuance unless a timely petition for judicial review or a timely request for Board reconsideration is filed. A party may request Board reconsideration within 30 days under 20 C.F.R. § 802.407.
Plain-English summary
Lowell Hansen's employer, Energy West Mining Company, withdrew its appeal in his black lung benefits case. The employer also asked that the claim be sent to the district director for payment. The Board treated the withdrawal as an end to the employer's challenge on all issues. It dismissed the appeal and sent the claim back for Energy West to pay Hansen's benefits.
Decision snapshot
- Authority: Appeal dismissal under 20 C.F.R. § 802.401.
- Outcome: Employer's appeal dismissed; claim returned to the district director for payment of benefits.
- Key point: Withdrawal of the appeal ended the employer's challenge to benefits.
Full text (BRB public release)
U.S. Department of Labor
Benefits Review Board
200 Constitution Ave. NW
Washington, DC 20210-0001
BRB No. 26-0118 BLA
Case No. 2023-BLA-05944
LOWELL E. HANSEN
)
)
Claimant-Respondent ) DATE ISSUED: August 14, 2026
)
v. )
)
ENERGY WEST MINING COMPANY
)
)
Employer-Petitioner )
)
DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF WORKERS’
)
COMPENSATION PROGRAMS, UNITED
)
STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
)
)
Party-in-Interest- ) ORDER
The Board is in receipt of Employer’s motion to withdraw its appeal in the captioned case. Employer requests the claim be remanded to the district director for payment of benefits.
The Board accepts Employer’s request as a withdrawal of controversion of all issues. See Pendley v. Director, OWCP, 13 BLR 1-23 (1989). Accordingly, we grant Employer’s motion to dismiss its appeal and remand this case to the district director for the payment of benefits to Claimant by Employer. 20 C.F.R. § 802.401.
SO ORDERED.
JONATHAN ROLFE, Acting Chief
Administrative Appeals Judge
MELISSA LIN JONES
Administrative Appeals Judge
GLENN E. ULMER
Administrative Appeals Judge
What applies to your situation today?
This order bound one employer. Ezel checks the current statutes and regulations the Board applies and Board precedent against your facts, with citations.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Checks the law as it stands today, not only this page
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace