River City Stone, Division of Mathy Construction Company (Commission decision, May 4, 2012)

Plain-English summary

River City Stone's counsel intended to contest two penalty assessments in one fax, but sent two copies of the other assessment's contest form and omitted the form for this case. After receiving a delinquency notice, River City moved to reopen in less than 30 days. The Secretary did not oppose the request. In the interests of justice, the Commission reopened the final assessment, remanded it for further proceedings, and directed the Secretary to file a penalty petition within 45 days.

Decision snapshot

• Governing authority: 30 U.S.C. § 815(a) and 29 C.F.R. §§ 2700.1(b) and 2700.28
• Outcome: The final assessment was reopened and remanded for penalty proceedings.
• Key point: A prompt reopening request may cure an apparent fax-attachment error when the record shows counsel intended to contest the assessment.

Full text (FMSHRC public release)

FEDERAL MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH REVIEW COMMISSION

601 NEW JERSEY AVENUE, NW

SUITE 9500

WASHINGTON, DC 20001

May 4, 2012

SECRETARY OF LABOR, 

MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH

ADMINISTRATION (MSHA)

v.

RIVER CITY STONE, DIVISION OF

MATHY CONSTRUCTION COMPANY

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

Docket No. CENT 2012-42-M

A.C. No. 13-02134-260772

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 October 19, 2011, the Commission received from River City Stone, Division of Mathy Construction Company (“River City”) a motion seeking to reopen a penalty assessment that had become 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).

The record indicates that the proposed assessment became a final order of the Commission on August 18, 2011. River City asserts that its counsel timely contested the assessment on July 21, 2011, concurrently with another contested assessment, No. 000260807. The Secretary does not oppose the request to reopen. However, the Secretary notes that although it appears by the fax coversheet that River City’s counsel intended to contest both cases, it only filed two copies of the contest form for A.C. No. 000260807.

In considering an operator’s request to reopen a final Commission order we find relevant the amount of time that has passed between the date the operator first learned the penalty was not timely contested and the operator’s filing of its motion to reopen. See, e.g., Left Fork Mining Co., 31 FMSHRC 8, 10-11 (Jan. 2009); Highland Mining Co., 31 FMSHRC 1313, 1316 (Nov. 2009). Here, River City filed its motion to reopen on October 18, 2011, less than 30 days after receiving MSHA’s delinquency notice, which was mailed on October 3, 2011.

Having reviewed River City’s request and the Secretary’s response, in the interests of justice, we hereby reopen this matter and remand it to the Chief Administrative Law Judge for further proceedings pursuant to the Mine Act and the Commission’s Procedural Rules, 29 C.F.R. Part 2700. Accordingly, consistent with Rule 28, the Secretary shall file a petition for assessment of penalty within 45 days of the date of this order. See 29 C.F.R. § 2700.28.

/s/ Mary Lu Jordan

Mary Lu Jordan, Chairman

/s/ Michael F. Duffy Michael F. Duffy, Commissioner

/s/ Michael G. Young Michael G. Young, Commissioner

/s/ Robert F. Cohen, Jr.

Robert F. Cohen, Jr., Commissioner

/s/ Patrick K. Nakamura Patrick K. Nakamura, Commissioner

Distribution:

Joshua Schultz, Esq.

Law Office of Adele L. Abrams, P.C.

4740 Corridor Place, Suite D

Beltsville, MD 20705

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