Con-Agg of MO, LLC (Commission decision, June 1, 2011)

Plain-English summary

Con-Agg of MO asked the Commission to reopen an assessment for six citations after it became a final order. Con-Agg said it first had constructive notice in November 2010, but MSHA records showed that Federal Express delivered the proposed assessment on September 7, 2010. The operator did not explain why it failed to contest the assessment within 30 days of that delivery. The Commission found the request insufficient and denied it without prejudice. Con-Agg could submit an amended or renewed request within 30 days of the order.

Decision snapshot

• Governing provisions: 29 C.F.R. § 2700.1(b); 30 U.S.C. §§ 801 and 815(a)
• Outcome: The reopening request was denied without prejudice, with 30 days allowed for a renewed request.
• Key point: An operator must explain why a timely delivered proposed assessment was not contested within the statutory 30-day period.

Full text (FMSHRC public release)

Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission

FEDERAL MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH REVIEW COMMISSION

601 NEW JERSEY AVENUE, NW

SUITE 9500

WASHINGTON, DC 20001

June 1, 2011

SECRETARY OF LABOR

MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH

ADMINISTRATION (MSHA)

v.

CON-AGG OF MO, LLC

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

Docket No. CENT 2011-193-M

A.C. No. 23-00078-230288

BEFORE: Jordan, Chairman; Duffy, Young, Cohen, and Nakamura, Commissioners

ORDER

BY THE COMMISSION:

This matter arises under the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977, 30 U.S.C.
§ 801 et seq. (2006) (“Mine Act”). On November 18, 2010, the Commission received a request to reopen a penalty assessment issued to Con-Agg of MO, LLC. (“Con-Agg”) that became a final order of the Commission pursuant to section 105(a) of the Mine Act, 30 U.S.C. § 815(a).

Under section 105(a) of the Mine Act, an operator who wishes to contest a proposed penalty must notify the Secretary of Labor no later than 30 days after receiving the proposed penalty assessment. If the operator fails to notify the Secretary, the proposed penalty assessment is deemed a final order of the Commission. 30 U.S.C. § 815(a).

We have held, however, that in appropriate circumstances, we possess jurisdiction to reopen uncontested assessments that have become final Commission orders under section 105(a). Jim Walter Res., Inc., 15 FMSHRC 782, 786-89 (May 1993) (“JWR”). In evaluating requests to reopen final section 105(a) orders, the Commission has found guidance in Rule 60(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure under which, for example, a party could be entitled to relief from a final order of the Commission on the basis of mistake, inadvertence, or excusable neglect. See 29 C.F.R. § 2700.1(b) (“the Commission and its Judges shall be guided so far as practicable by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure”); JWR, 15 FMSHRC at 787. We have also observed that default is a harsh remedy and that, if the defaulting party can make a showing of good cause for a failure to timely respond, the case may be reopened and appropriate proceedings on the merits permitted. See Coal Prep. Servs., Inc., 17 FMSHRC 1529, 1530 (Sept. 1995).

On August 31, 2010, the Department of Labor’s Mine Safety and Health Administration (“MSHA”) issued Proposed Assessment No. 000230288 to Con-Agg for six citations issued to the operator in July 2010. Con-Agg states that it first had constructive notice of the “citation” on November 8, 2010, and received actual notice on November 12, 2010.

The Secretary opposes reopening because MSHA records show that the proposed assessment was delivered to Con-Agg via Federal Express on September 7, 2010. The Secretary notes that except for Con-Agg’s suggestion that it did not receive the proposed assessment, the operator does not explain why it failed to contest the proposed assessment within 30 days of receiving it.

Having reviewed the operator’s request to reopen and the Secretary’s response thereto, we agree that Con-Agg has failed to provide a sufficient basis for the Commission to reopen the penalty assessment. The record indicates that Con-Agg received the proposed assessment on September 7, 2010, and was notified that it had 30 days from that date within which to contest the proposed assessment. Accordingly, we hereby deny without prejudice Con-Agg’s request to reopen. FKZ Coal Inc., 29 FMSHRC 177, 178 (Apr. 2007); Petra Materials, 31 FMSHRC 47, 49 (Jan. 2009). The words “without prejudice” mean that Con-Agg may submit another request to reopen Assessment No. 000230288.

Any amended or renewed request by the operator to
reopen this assessment must be filed within 30 days of this order. Any such request filed after that time will be denied with prejudice.

______

Mary Lu Jordan, Chairman

______

Michael F. Duffy, Commissioner

______

Michael G. Young, Commissioner

______

Robert F. Cohen, Jr., Commissioner

______

Patrick K. Nakamura, Commissioner

Distribution:

Patrick Short, Manager

Con-Agg of Mo, LLC

2604 Stadium Blvd.

Columbia, MO 65202-1271

W. Christian Schumann, Esq.,

Office of the Solicitor

U.S. Department of Labor

1100 Wilson Blvd., Room 2220

Arlington, VA 22209-2296

Melanie Garris

Office of Civil Penalty Compliance

MSHA

U.S. Dept. of Labor

1100 Wilson Blvd., 25th Floor

Arlington, VA 22209-3939

Chief Administrative Law Judge Robert J. Lesnick

Federal Mine Safety & Health Review Commission

601 New Jersey Avenue, N.W., Suite 9500

Washington, D.C. 20001-2021