Secretary of Labor v. GCC Permian
Secretary of Labor v. GCC Permian (FMSHRC CENT 2022-0218): Contest sent to wrong MSHA office was reopened
Apply this precedent to your situation
This is citable Commission precedent from 2023, and it may have been appealed since. Ezel checks how it stands today and answers your situation, with citations.
Plain-English summary
GCC Permian timely mailed a notice of contest, but its safety manager did not verify the address. The contest was accidentally sent to MSHA's penalty collections office in St. Louis together with payment for the uncontested citations. The assessment therefore became a final Commission order even though the operator had tried to contest it. The Secretary did not oppose reopening but urged GCC Permian to prevent future errors. The Commission found an inadvertent administrative error, reopened the assessment, and remanded the case.
Decision snapshot
- Cited authority: 30 U.S.C. § 815(a)
- Outcome: The final assessment was reopened and remanded for further proceedings.
- Key point: Timely sending a contest to the wrong MSHA office supported reopening as an administrative mistake.
Full text (FMSHRC public release)
FEDERAL
MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH REVIEW COMMISSION
1331
PENNSYLVANIA AVE., N.W., SUITE 520N
WASHINGTON,
DC 20004-1710
SECRETARY
OF LABOR,
MINE
SAFETY AND HEALTH
ADMINISTRATION
(MSHA)
v.
GCC
PERMIAN
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
Docket
No. CENT 2022-0218
A.C.
No. 41-00060-555004
BEFORE:
Jordan, Chair; Althen, Rajkovich, and Baker, 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. (2018) (“Mine Act”). On August 16, 2022, the Commission received
from GCC Permian 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 orders, the Commission has found guidance
in Rule 60(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, under which the
Commission may relieve a party from a final order of the Commission on the
basis of mistake, inadvertence, excusable neglect, or other reason justifying
relief. 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).
Records
of the Department of Labor’s Mine Safety and Health Administration (“MSHA”)
indicate that the proposed assessment was delivered on May 26, 2022, and became
a final order of the Commission on June 27, 2022. GCC Permian asserts that the
notice of contest was timely mailed on June 6, 2022, however the safety manager
failed to verify that the correct address was used, and the paperwork was
accidentally sent to MSHA’s penalty collections office in St. Louis along with
the payment of the uncontested citations. The Secretary does not oppose the
request to reopen, but urges the operator to take steps to ensure that future
penalty contests are timely filed.
Having
reviewed GCC Permian’s request and the
Secretary’s response, we find that the failure to properly file the
notice of contest was the result of inadvertent administrative error. We urge
the operator to take steps to ensure that such errors do not recur. Nevertheless,
in the interest 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,
Chair
/s/ William I. Althen
William I. Althen, Commissioner
/s/ Marco M. Rajkovich, Jr.
Marco M. Rajkovich, Jr., Commissioner
/s/ Timothy J. Baker
Timothy J. Baker, Commissioner
Distribution:
Matthew
Lawson
GCC
Permian
P.O.
Box 1547
Odessa,
TX 79760
April
Nelson, Esq.
Associate
Solicitor
Office
of the Solicitor
U.S.
Department of Labor
Division
of Mine Safety and Health
201
12th Street South, Suite 401
Arlington,
VA 22202
Emily
Toler Scott, Esq.
Counsel
for Appellate Litigation
Office
of the Solicitor
U.S.
Department of Labor
Division
of Mine Safety and Health
201
12th Street South, Suite 401
Arlington,
VA 22202
Melanie
Garris
USDOL/MSHA,
OAASEI/CPCO
201
12th Street South, Suite 401
Arlington,
VA 22202
Chief
Administrative Law Judge Glynn F. Voisin
Federal
Mine Safety Health Review Commission
1331
Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Suite 520N
Washington,
DC 20004-1710
Get today's answer for your situation
You just read Commission precedent from 2023. Ezel checks whether it still stands, including any court review since, and answers your specific situation, with citations.
Opens in Ezel Pro. Every answer cites the authority it relies on.