Secretary of Labor v. Liggett Mining, LLC (Commission decision, October 30, 2009)

Plain-English summary

Liggett Mining mailed four penalty contests separately by certified mail nine days after receiving the assessments. Delivery records showed that MSHA received all four envelopes two days later, but MSHA later sent delinquency notices because it had no record of the contests. Liggett promptly sought reopening and supplied copies of its notices and delivery records. The Secretary accepted the copies and agreed to file penalty petitions. Because the contests would proceed as timely, the Commission dismissed the reopening requests as moot.

Decision snapshot

• Governing provisions: 29 C.F.R. § 2700.1(b) and 30 U.S.C. § 815(a)
• Outcome: Four reopening requests were dismissed as moot, and the Secretary was directed to file penalty petitions.
• Key point: Certified-mail delivery records and retained contest copies can establish timely filing when MSHA's own records are incomplete.

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

October 30, 2009

SECRETARY OF LABOR,

MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH

ADMINISTRATION (MSHA)

v.

CESSFORD CONSTRUCTION COMPANY

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

Docket No. KENT 2010-1
A.C. No. 15-18687-188524

Docket No. KENT 2010-2
A.C. No. 15-18854-188526

Docket No. KENT 2010-3
A.C. No. 15-19080-188530

Docket No. KENT 2010-4
A.C. No. 15-19234-188533

BEFORE: Jordan, Chairman; Duffy, 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 October 2, 2009, the Commission received from Liggett Mining, LLC (“Liggett”) motions to reopen four penalty assessments that may have become final orders 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).

We have held, however, 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 mistake, inadvertence, or excusable neglect. 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).

Each of the four assessments was dated June 18, 2009, and received by Liggett. According to the motions, Liggett’s representative marked each of the assessments indicating which penalties the operator was contesting and mailed the four notices separately, on June 27, 2009, using certified mail. According to copies of the on-line records of delivery submitted by Liggett with its motions, the four envelopes were received by the Department of Labor’s Mine Safety and Health Administration two days later. Nevertheless, Liggett received delinquency notices for the assessments dated September 10, 2009, which caused it to promptly file its motions to reopen.

The Secretary of Labor states that, while she has no record of receiving the notices of contest, given the information provided by Liggett, she will accept the copies of the notices of contest included with Liggett’s motions. The Secretary states in her letters dated October 9, 2009, that she will file penalty petitions within 45 days of that date.

Having reviewed Liggett’s motions and the Secretary’s responses, we find the requests to reopen to be moot. These cases shall proceed pursuant to the Mine Act and the Commission’s Procedural Rules, 29 C.F.R. Part 2700, and, per her statements, the Secretary’s penalty petitions shall be filed no later than November 23, 2009.

Mary Lu Jordan, Chairman

Michael F. Duffy, Commissioner

Michael G. Young, Commissioner

Robert F. Cohen, Jr., Commissioner

Distribution:

James Bowman,

Liggett Mining, LLC,

P.O. Box 99,

Midway, WV 25878

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