Ideker, Inc.
Ideker, Inc. (FMSHRC CENT 94-217-M): $500 settlement approved
Apply this to your situation
This order from 1995 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
Ideker, Inc. faced a civil penalty proceeding concerning the Amazonia Quarry. After an evidentiary hearing, the parties moved to approve a settlement and dismiss the case. Judge Roy J. Maurer approved a reduction in the proposed penalty from $1,000 to $500 and ordered payment within 30 days. The proceedings were to be dismissed after MSHA received payment.
Decision snapshot
- Cited provisions: 30 U.S.C. § 815(d); 30 U.S.C. § 820(i)
- Outcome: The settlement was approved, the penalty was reduced to $500, and the proceedings were ordered dismissed after payment.
- Key point: The ALJ approved the settlement after considering the parties' representations, documentation, and hearing testimony under the Mine Act's penalty criteria.
Full text (FMSHRC public release)
FEDERAL MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH REVIEW COMMISSION
OFFICE OF A D M INISTRA TIV E LA W JUDGES
2 SK YLINE, 10 th FLOOR
5203 LEESBURG PIK E
FA LLS CHURCH, V IRGINIA 22041
May 18, 1995
SECRETARY OF LABOR, : CIVIL PENALTY PROCEEDING
MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH :
ADMINISTRATION (MSHA), : Docket No. CENT 94-217-M
Petitioner : A. C. No. 23-02071-05505
v. :
: Amazonia Quarry
IDEKER, INC., :
Respondent :
DECISION APPROVING SETTLEMENT
Appearances: Margaret A. Miller, Esq., Office of the Solicitor,
U. S. Department of Labor, Denver, Colorado, for
the Secretary;
Ken Ideker, St. Joseph, Missouri, pro se.
Before: Judge Maurer
This case is before me upon a petition for assessment of
civil penalty under section 105(d) of the Federal Mine Safety and
Health Act of 1977 (the Act). An evidentiary hearing in this
matter was held on March 2, 1995, in St. Joseph, Missouri. At the
conclusion of that hearing, the parties filed a motion to approve
a settlement agreement and to dismiss this case. A reduction in
penalty from $1000 to $500 is proposed. I have considered the
representations and documentation submitted in this case, as well
as the testimony contained in the record of proceedings and I
conclude that the proffered settlement is appropriate under the
criteria set forth in section 110(i) of the Act.
WHEREFORE, the motion for approval of settlement is GRANTED,
and it is ORDERED that respondent pay a penalty of $500 within
30 days of the date of this decision, and upon receipt of that
payment by MSHA, these proceedings are DISMISSED.
Roy J. Maurer
Administrative Law Judge
Distribution:
Margaret A. Miller, Esq., Office of the Solicitor,
U. S. Department of Labor, 1999 Broadway, Suite 1600, Denver, CO
Page 2
80202-5716 (Certified Mail)
Mr. Ken Ideker, Ideker, Inc., 4614 South 40th Street,
P. O. Box 7140, St. Joseph, MO 64507 (Certified Mail)
dcp
Page 3
EXHIBITS
EXHIBITS TO CENT 94-217-M (Ideker, Inc.)
Petitioner's Exhibits
Exhibit P-1 - R34- Assessed Violation History Report
Exhibit P-2 - MSHA Form 7000-3 (Mine Citation/Order)
Exhibit P-3 - Hand drawing of an intersecting conveyor belt
Exhibit P-3 - MSHA Form 7000-3 (Mine Citation/Order)
Picture 1 - Conveyor belt
Picture 2 - Conveyor belt
Picture 3 - Conveyor belt
Picture 4 - Intersecting conveyor belts
Picture 5 - Intersecting conveyor belts
Picture 6 - Intersecting conveyor belts
3
Get today's answer for your situation
You just read what one judge decided for one employer in 1995, 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.