FMSHRC ALJ decision Docket CENT 91-176-M Decided April 24, 1992 Settled Judge John Morris

Grefco, Incorporated

Grefco, Incorporated (FMSHRC CENT 91-176-M): Settlement approved and penalty reduced

Apply this to your situation

This order from 1992 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 1992
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

Grefco, Incorporated and the Secretary agreed to settle a civil penalty proceeding before a hearing. The parties agreed to remove the significant-and-substantial allegations and reduce the proposed penalty for Citation No. 3448926 from $192 to $20. Judge John Morris found the settlement reasonable and in the public interest, approved it, affirmed the amended citation and penalty, and canceled the scheduled hearing.

Decision snapshot

  • Cited standards: The decision identifies a mandatory regulation but does not state its section number; it cites 30 U.S.C. §§ 801 and 820(i).
  • Outcome: The settlement and amended citation were affirmed, with a $20 penalty due within 40 days.
  • Key point: A judge may approve a prehearing settlement that removes an S&S allegation and reduces the proposed penalty when the settlement is reasonable and in the public interest.

Full text (FMSHRC public release)

             Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission
                    Office of Administrative Law Judges
                           The Federal Building
                      Room 280, 1244 Speer Boulevard
                             Denver, CO 80204

SECRETARY OF LABOR, CIVIL PENALTY PROCEEDING
MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH
ADMINISTRATION (MSHA), Docket No. CENT 91-176-M
PETITIONER A.C. No. 29-01433-05523
v.
Grefco Plant and Quarry
GREFCO, INCORPORATED,
RESPONDENT

                       DECISION APPROVING SETTLEMENT

Before: Judge Morris

 This is a civil penalty proceeding initiated by Petitioner

against Respondent pursuant to the Federal Mine Safety and Health
Act of 1977, 30 U.S.C. 801 et seq. The civil penalty sought
here is for the violation of a mandatory regulation promulgated
pursuant to the Act.

 Prior to a hearing, the parties filed a motion and agreed

that the "significant and substantial" allegations be stricken.
The parties further submitted information relating to the
statutory criteris for assessing civil penalties as contained in
30 U.S.C. 820(i).

 In addition, the parties agreed to settle Citation No.

3448926, originally assessed for $192, for the sum of $20.

 I have reviewed the settlement and I find it is reasonable

and in the public interest. It should be approved.

   Accordingly, I enter the following:

                                    ORDER

   1. The settlement is APPROVED.

 2. Citation No. 3448926 and the amended penalty are

AFFIRMED.

 3. Respondent is ORDERED TO PAY to the Secretary of Labor the sum

of $20 within 40 days of the date of this decision.

 4. The hearing scheduled in Denver, Colorado, for May 22,

1992, is CANCELED.

                                 John J. Morris

Get today's answer for your situation

You just read what one judge decided for one employer in 1992, 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.