FMSHRC ALJ decision Docket CENT 84-68-M, CENT 84-69-M Decided October 16, 1986 Settled Judge Gary Melick

Amax Chemical Corporation

Amax Chemical Corporation (FMSHRC CENT 84-68-M and CENT 84-69-M): Settlement approved and stay lifted

Apply this to your situation

This order from 1986 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.

Currency note: this decision dates from 1986
The MSHA standards may have been amended, penalty amounts have been adjusted, and later Commission or court decisions may have changed the analysis since then. Treat this page as historical context, not current compliance advice. Verify the current standard before relying on any specific rule, threshold, or penalty mentioned here.
Final ALJ decision, not Commission precedent
This decision became final under the 40-day rule in 30 U.S.C. § 823(d)(1) because no later Commission review appears in the official index. It binds the parties but is not Commission precedent. The full text below is from the official FMSHRC release.
About this page: The plain-English summary and decision snapshot below were written by Ezel based on the official FMSHRC release. The full text is the agency's own release.
Read the official release (fmshrc.gov)

Plain-English summary

Amax Chemical Corporation faced two civil-penalty proceedings in which the parties proposed reducing the penalties from $2,925 to $445. After hearings on the merits and a later Commission decision involving Amax, the parties renewed their settlement request. Judge Gary Melick approved the settlement, lifted the stays issued in June 1985, approved deletion of the significant-and-substantial findings and vacation of the citations described in the settlement motion, and ordered Amax to pay $445 within 30 days.

Decision snapshot

  • Cited standards: None stated in the release
  • Outcome: The settlement was approved, the stays were lifted, and a $445 penalty was ordered.
  • Key point: The ALJ approved a renewed settlement after considering the record and the effect of a later Commission decision involving Amax.

Full text (FMSHRC public release)

CCASE:
SOL (MSHA) V. AMAX CHEMICAL
DDATE:
19861016
TTEXT:


Page 2

~1533

       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 84-68-M
PETITIONER A.C. No. 24-00174-05515

      v.                            Docket No. CENT 84-69-M
                                    A.C. No. 29-00174-05516

AMAX CHEMICAL CORPORATION,
RESPONDENT Amax Mine & Mill

                      ORDER LIFTING STAY
                             AND
                DECISION APPROVING SETTLEMENT

Appearances: Jack F. Ostrander, Esq., Office of the
Solicitor, U.S. Department of Labor, Dallas,
Texas for Petitioner; Charles C. High, Jr., Esq.,
Kemp, Smith, Duncan & Hammond, El Paso, Texas,
for Respondent.

Before: Judge Melick

 These cases are before me upon petitions for assessment of

civil penalty under Section 110(d) of the Federal Mine Safety and
Health Act of 1977 (the Act). Petitioner had filed motions to
approve settlement agreements and to dismiss the cases proposing
a reduction in penalties from $2,925 to $445. These motions were
denied by the undersigned and hearings on the merits were held.
Following those hearings and the subsequent release by the
Commission of the decision in Secretary v. Amax Chemical
Corporation, 8 FMSHRC ÄÄÄÄ (Docket No. CENT 84Ä91ÄM) the parties
renewed their request for settlement. I have considered the
testimony and documentation submitted and I have evaluated the
effect of the Commission's decision in Amax, supra, on these
cases. Under the circumstances I now conclude that the proffered
settlement is appropriate.

 WHEREFORE, the Stay Orders issued June 18, 1985 are lifted,

the motions for approval of settlement are GRANTED, and it is
ORDERED that Respondent pay a penalty of $445 within 30 days of
this order. The deletion of "significant


Page 3

~1534
and substantial" findings and the vacation of citations set forth
in the Motion for Settlement are accordingly also approved.

                      Gary Melick
                      Administrative Law Judge

Get today's answer for your situation

You just read what one judge decided for one employer in 1986, and it binds only those parties. Ezel checks the current MSHA standards and Commission precedent and answers your specific situation, with citations.

Opens in Ezel Pro. Every answer cites the authority it relies on.