Ezel / Agency Decisions / CENT 85-111-D

United Mine Workers of America on behalf of Eugene Ronchetto, Gary Gene Ronchetto, and Randall T. McQuay v. Associated Electric Cooperative, Inc. (ALJ decision, December 2, 1985)

United Mine Workers of America v. Associated Electric Cooperative, Inc. (FMSHRC CENT 85-111-D): Three discrimination cases settled

Decision type
ALJ decision
Dockets
CENT 85-111-D, CENT 85-112-D, CENT 85-113-D
Decided
December 2, 1985
Presiding judge
John J. Morris
Outcome
Settled
Precedential status
Final order, not precedent
Checked against source
2026-10-20
Cited standards
30 U.S.C. § 815(c)
Official source
Read the official release (fmshrc.gov)
PDF
View Official PDF

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.

Currency note: this decision dates from 1985
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

The United Mine Workers of America brought three discrimination cases on behalf of Eugene Ronchetto, Gary Gene Ronchetto, and Randall T. McQuay against Associated Electric Cooperative, Inc. The parties reached a settlement before a hearing, contingent on resolving a related civil penalty case. Associated Electric agreed to stop directing rear lug "band-aid" welding on a dragline while it was operating. Judge John J. Morris noted that he had already approved the related penalty settlement and found this agreement reasonable and satisfactory to the complainants. He approved it and dismissed the three discrimination proceedings.

Decision snapshot

  • Governing provision: Mine Act discrimination proceedings under 30 U.S.C. § 815(c).
  • Outcome: Settlement approved; all three discrimination cases dismissed.
  • Key point: The operator agreed to stop a specified welding practice while a dragline was operating.

Full text (FMSHRC public release)

CCASE:
(UMWA) v. ASSOCIATED ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE
DDATE:
198501202
TTEXT:
~2032
Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission Office of Administrative Law Judges

UNITED MINE WORKERS OF
DISCRIMINATION PROCEEDINGS
AMERICA (UMWA),
ON BEHALF OF
Docket No. CENT 85-111-D
EUGENE RONCHETTO,
MADI CD 85-6
GARY GENE RONCHETTO,
RANDALL T. MCQUAY,
Docket No. CENT 85-112-D
COMPLAINANTS MADI CD 85-7

v. Docket No. CENT 85-113-D
MADI CD 85-8
ASSOCIATED ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE,
INC.,
Prairie Hill Mine
RESPONDENT

DECISION APPROVING SETTLEMENT

Before: Judge Morris

These are consolidated discrimination proceedings initiated by complainants in accordance with the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977, 30 U.S.C. 801 et seq.

Prior to a hearing the parties reached an amicable settlement and they have now filed a written agreement herein.

The agreement provides that it is contingent upon the settlement of all proceedings, including the civil penalty proceeding docketed as Associated Electric Cooperative, Inc.
(AECI), Docket No. CENT 85-66.

In addition, it appears that the proposed settlement is satisfactory to the individual complainants.

In consideration of the proposed settlement respondent agrees to refrain from directing any rear lug "band-aid" welding on any dragline while it is in operation.

Discussion

I have reviewed the proposed settlement and I find that it is reasonable and it should be approved.

The judge further finds that his decision approving a settlement in Associated Electric Cooperative, Inc. (AECI), Docket No. CENT 85-66, was issued November 19, 1985.
~2033
Accordingly, I enter the following:

ORDER

1. The settlement agreement is approved.

2. The discrimination proceedings are dismissed.

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