FMSHRC Commission decision Docket KENT 2012-881 Decided February 12, 2013 Remanded

Secretary of Labor v. Redhawk Mining, LLC

Secretary of Labor v. Redhawk Mining, LLC (FMSHRC KENT 2012-881): Contest-form mistake excused

Apply this precedent to your situation

This is citable Commission precedent from 2013, and it may have been appealed since. Ezel checks how it stands today and answers your situation, with citations.

Currency note: this decision dates from 2013
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.
Decision of the Commission
This is a decision of the Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission, the highest level of agency review, citable as Commission precedent. It may have been appealed to a U.S. Court of Appeals after issuance under 30 U.S.C. § 816; check subsequent history before relying on it. 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 Commission's own document.
Read the official release (fmshrc.gov)

Plain-English summary

Redhawk Mining sought to reopen an MSHA penalty assessment that had become a final Commission order. Redhawk said it submitted a timely notice of contest but accidentally marked the wrong box and discovered the mistake after receiving MSHA's penalty petition. The Secretary did not oppose reopening. The Commission reopened the assessment in the interests of justice, remanded the case for further proceedings, and directed the Secretary to file a penalty petition within 45 days.

Decision snapshot

  • Governing provisions: 30 U.S.C. § 815(a); 29 C.F.R. § 2700.28
  • Outcome: The final assessment was reopened and remanded for penalty proceedings.
  • Key point: A timely contest submitted with the wrong box marked supported unopposed relief from the final assessment.

Full text (FMSHRC public release)



FEDERAL
MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH REVIEW COMMISSION

1331 PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE, NW, SUITE
520N

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20004-1710

February 12, 2013

SECRETARY OF LABOR,
MINE SAFETY AND
HEALTH
ADMINISTRATION (MSHA)

v.

REDHAWK MINING, LLC
:
:
:
:
:
:
:

Docket No. KENT
2012-881
A.C. No. 15-19242-280611-02

BEFORE: Jordan, Chairman;
Young and Nakamura, 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 April 19, 2012, the Commission received from Redhawk Mining,
LLC (“Redhawk”) a motion seeking 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).

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).

Redhawk asserts that it filed a
timely notice of contest but mistakenly marked the wrong box. Redhawk discovered
its mistake after receiving the Department of Labor’s Mine Safety and Health
Administration’s (“MSHA”) petition for assessment of civil penalty. The
Secretary does not oppose the request to reopen.

Having
reviewed Redhawk’s request and the
Secretary’s response, in the interests of justice, we hereby reopen this matter
and remand it to the Chief Administrative Law Judge for further proceedings
pursuant to the Mine Act and the Commission’s Procedural Rules, 29 C.F.R. Part
2700. Accordingly, consistent with Rule 28, the Secretary shall file a
petition for assessment of penalty within 45 days of the date of this order.
See 29 C.F.R. § 2700.28.

/s/ Mary
Lu Jordan

Mary Lu Jordan, Commissioner

/s/
Michael G. Young

Michael G. Young, Commissioner

/s/
Patrick K. Nakamura

Patrick K. Nakamura, Commissioner

Distribution:

Billy R. Shelton, Esq., Jones

Walters, Turner & Shelton PLLC

151 N. Eagle Creek Drive, Suite 310

Lexington, KY 40509

W. Christian Schumann, Esq.

Office of the Solicitor

U.S. Department of Labor

1100 Wilson Blvd., Room 2220

Arlington, VA 22209-2296

Melanie Garris

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

1331 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W., Suite 520N

Washington, D.C. 20004-1710

Get today's answer for your situation

You just read Commission precedent from 2013. Ezel checks whether it still stands, including any court review since, and answers your specific situation, with citations.

Opens in Ezel Pro. Every answer cites the authority it relies on.