Secretary of Labor v. Homestake Mining Company (ALJ decision, January 14, 1985)
Secretary of Labor v. Homestake Mining Company (FMSHRC CENT 83-31-M): Two citations settled for $40 after amendment
Apply this to your situation
This order from 1985 bound only the parties to this case; it isn't precedent. Ask about your situation and see what the current MSHA standards and Commission precedent say, with citations.
Plain-English summary
MSHA brought two safety citations against Homestake Mining Company at its Homestake Mine. The parties reached a settlement during the hearing. Judge John J. Morris approved the proposed $20 penalty for citation 2097208 under section 57.12-30. For citation 2097774, the parties said the evidence supported section 57.4-9 instead of the originally cited section 57.4-1, so the judge allowed that amendment and the company withdrew its contest. He affirmed both citations with $20 penalties, totaling $40. The decision does not describe the underlying mine conditions.
Decision snapshot
- Cited standards: 30 C.F.R. §§ 57.12-30 and 57.4-9; section 57.4-1 was amended out of the second citation.
- Outcome: Settlement approved; both citations affirmed for $40 total.
- Key point: The parties corrected one citation's regulatory provision before the company withdrew its contest.
Full text (FMSHRC public release)
CCASE:
SOL (MSHA) V. HOMESTAKE MINING
DDATE:
19850114
TTEXT:
~92
Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission Office of Administrative Law Judges
SECRETARY OF LABOR,
CIVIL PENALTY PROCEEDING
MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH
ADMINISTRATION (MSHA),
Docket No. CENT 83-31-M
PETITIONER
A.C. No. 39-00055-05508
v. Homestake Mine
HOMESTAKE MINING COMPANY,
RESPONDENT
DECISION
Appearances: Eliehue C. Brunson, Esq., Office of the Solicitor, U.S. Department of Labor, Kansas City, Missouri, for Petitioner; Robert A. Amundson, Esq., Amundson & Fuller, Lead, South Dakota, for Respondent.
Before: Judge Morris
The Secretary of Labor, on behalf of the Mine Safety and Health Administration, charges respondent with violating two safety regulations promulgated under the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act, 30 U.S.C. 801 et seq.
After notice to the parties, a hearing on the merits commenced on October 30, 1984 in Rapid City, South Dakota.
Prior to the conclusion of the hearing the parties reached an amicable settlement.
The citations, the standards allegedly violated, the initial assessments, and the proposed dispositions are as follows:
30 C.F.R. Section Assessed
Citation No. Violated Penalty Disposition
2097208 57.12Ä30 $20.00 $20.00
2097774 57.4Ä9 20.00 20.00
The proposed disposition as to Citation 2097208 is in order and it should be approved.
Concerning Citation 2097774, the parties advised the judge that the evidence established a violation of 30 C.F.R. 57.4Ä9, ~93 instead of 30 C.F.R. 57.4Ä1. The citation was amended.
Fed.R.Civ.P. 15(a). Respondent thereupon moved to withdraw its
notice of contest and to pay the proposed penalty. Pursuant to
Commission Rule 11, 29 C.F.R. 2700.11, the motion was granted.
Accordingly, I enter the following:
ORDER
1. The settlement agreement is approved.
2. The following citations and proposed penalties are
AFFIRMED:
Citation No.
Penalty
2097208
$20.00
2097774
20.00
John J. Morris
Administrative Law Judge
What applies to your situation today?
This order bound one employer. Ezel checks the current MSHA standards and Commission 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