Freedom Energy Mining Company (Commission decision, June 15, 2009)
Freedom Energy Mining Company (FMSHRC KENT 2009-705): One-year limit barred reopening
Apply this precedent to your situation
This is citable Commission precedent from 2009, and it may have been appealed since. Ezel checks how it stands today and answers your situation, with citations.
Plain-English summary
Freedom Energy intended to contest a proposed penalty assessment, and its counsel drafted a cover letter, but counsel inadvertently did not file the contest with MSHA. The assessment became a final Commission order on November 14, 2007. Freedom Energy did not request reopening until more than one year later. Because Rule 60(b) allows no more than one year to seek relief based on mistake, inadvertence, or excusable neglect, the Commission denied the request as untimely.
Decision snapshot
- Governing provisions: 29 C.F.R. § 2700.1(b) and 30 U.S.C. § 815(a)
- Outcome: The request to reopen the final assessment was denied as untimely.
- Key point: A reopening request based on counsel's inadvertence cannot be granted when filed more than one year after the assessment became final.
Full text (FMSHRC public release)
Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission
FEDERAL MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH REVIEW COMMISSION
601 NEW JERSEY AVENUE, NW
SUITE 9500
WASHINGTON, DC 20001
June 15, 2009
SECRETARY OF LABOR,
MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH
ADMINISTRATION (MSHA)
v.
FREEDOM ENERGY MINING COMPANY
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
Docket No. KENT 2009-705
A.C. No. 15-07082-128255
BEFORE: Duffy, Chairman; Jordan, Young, and Cohen, Commissioners
ORDER
BY THE COMMISSION:
This matter arises under the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977, 30 U.S.C.
§ 801 et seq. (2006) (“Mine Act”). On February 12, 2009, the Commission received from Freedom Energy Mining Company (“Freedom Energy”) a motion from counsel to reopen a penalty assessment that had become a final order of the Commission pursuant to section 105(a) of the Mine Act, 30 U.S.C. § 815(a).
Under section 105(a) of the Mine Act, an operator who wishes to contest a proposed penalty must notify the Secretary of Labor no later than 30 days after receiving the proposed penalty assessment. If the operator fails to notify the Secretary, the proposed penalty assessment is deemed a final order of the Commission. 30 U.S.C. § 815(a).
The proposed penalty assessment at issue, No. 000128255, was issued to Freedom Energy by the Department of Labor’s Mine Safety and Health Administration (“MSHA”) on October 4, 2007. Freedom Energy states that it intended to file a contest as demonstrated by the cover letter which its counsel drafted at that time
but that through inadvertence of counsel, the contest was
not filed with MSHA.
In response, the Secretary states that the assessment at issue cannot be reopened because it became a final order of the Commission on November 14, 2007, which is more than one year before Freedom Energy filed its reopening request.
We have held that in appropriate circumstances, we possess jurisdiction to reopen uncontested assessments that have become final Commission orders under section 105(a). Jim Walter Res., Inc., 15 FMSHRC 782, 786-89 (May 1993) (“JWR”). In evaluating requests to reopen final section 105(a) orders, the Commission has found guidance in Rule 60(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure under which, for example, a party could be entitled to relief from a final order of the Commission on the basis of inadvertence or mistake. See 29 C.F.R.
§ 2700.1(b) (“the Commission and its Judges shall be guided so far as practicable by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure”); JWR, 15 FMSHRC at 787. We have also observed that default is a harsh remedy and that, if the defaulting party can make a showing of good cause for a failure to timely respond, the case may be reopened and appropriate proceedings on the merits permitted. See Coal Prep. Servs., Inc., 17 FMSHRC 1529, 1530 (Sept. 1995).
We have been presented with Freedom Energy’s failure to timely contest the proposed penalty assessment. Under Rule 60(b), any motion for relief must be made within a reasonable time, and in the case of mistake, inadvertence, or excusable neglect, not more than one year after the order was entered. Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b). Because Freedom Energy did not seek relief from the final order until more than one year had passed, its request is untimely. J S Sand & Gravel, Inc., 26 FMSHRC 795, 796 (Oct. 2004). Accordingly, Freedom Energy’s request is denied.
Michael F. Duffy, Chairman
Mary Lu Jordan, Commissioner
Michael G. Young, Commissioner
Robert F. Cohen, Jr., Commissioner
Distribution:
Carol Ann Marunich, Esq.
Dinsmore & Shohl, LLP
215 Don Knotts Blvd., Suite 310
Morgantown, WV 26501
W. Christian Schumann, Esq.
Office of the Solicitor
U.S. Department of Labor
1100 Wilson Blvd., Room 2220
Arlington, VA 22209-2296
Myra James, Chief
Office of Civil Penalty Compliance, MSHA
U.S. Dept. Of Labor
1100 Wilson Blvd., 25th Floor
Arlington, VA 22209-3939
Chief Administrative Law Judge Robert J. Lesnick
Federal Mine Safety & Health Review Commission
601 New Jersey Avenue, N.W., Suite 9500
Washington, D.C. 20001-2021
Does this precedent still control your case?
Ezel checks whether it still stands, including any court review since, and applies it to your situation 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