Secretary of Labor v. Ohio County Coal Company, LLC (Commission decision, May 30, 2013)

Plain-English summary

Ohio County Coal said an internal mail-delivery failure delayed its safety manager's receipt of a proposed assessment. The company mailed its contest seven days after the assessment became final. The Secretary did not oppose reopening solely because the delay was short, but noted that this was the operator's third reopening request based on the same internal-mail problem. The Commission warned that an inadequate or unreliable processing system usually does not justify relief. It nevertheless reopened the assessment in the interests of justice and remanded it for penalty proceedings.

Decision snapshot

• Governing provisions: 30 U.S.C. § 815(a); 29 C.F.R. §§ 2700.1(b) and 2700.28
• Outcome: The final assessment was reopened and remanded, with a penalty petition due within 45 days.
• Key point: The Commission granted relief for a short delay but warned that repeated defaults caused by the same internal mail system were unlikely to justify future reopening.

Full text (FMSHRC public release)



FEDERAL
MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH REVIEW COMMISSION

1331 PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE, NW, SUITE
520N

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20004-1710

May 30, 2013

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

v.

OHIO COUNTY COAL
COMPANY, LLC
:
:
:
:
:
:
:

Docket No. KENT 2013-12
A.C. No. 15-17587-296918

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 October 1, 2012, the Commission received from Ohio County Coal Company, LLC (“Ohio”) 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).

The record indicates that
this proposed assessment was delivered on August 8, 2012, and became a final order of the Commission on September 7, 2012. Ohio asserts that its safety manager only received the proposed assessment on August 14, 2012, due to a failure with its internal mail delivery system. The Secretary does not oppose the request to reopen based solely on the fact that the penalty contest was mailed seven days after becoming a final order. The Secretary notes that MSHA received a payment for the uncontested penalties, by check dated September 25, 2012. The Secretary further notes that this is the operator’s third motion to reopen stating the same reason for late contest (KENT 2012-652, KENT 2012-656). The Secretary cautions that she may oppose future motions to reopen penalty assessments that are not contested in a timely manner.

The Commission has made it clear
that where a failure results from an inadequate or unreliable internal processing system, the operator is unlikely to establish grounds for reopening the assessment. Oak Grove Res., LLC, 33 FMSHRC 103, 104 (Feb. 2011); Double Bonus Coal Co., 32 FMSHRC 1155, 1156 (Sept. 2010); Highland Mining Co., 31 FMSHRC 1313, 1315 (Nov. 2009); Pinnacle Mining Co., 30 FMSHRC 1066, 1067 (Dec. 2008); Pinnacle Mining Co., 30 FMSHRC 1061, 1062 (Dec. 2008). As we stated in our previous order, we urge the operator to take all steps necessary to ensure that future penalty contests are timely filed. Ohio County Coal Co., 35 FMSHRC ___, slip op. at 2, Nos. KENT 2012-652, KENT 2012-656 (Jan. 3, 2013).

Having
reviewed Ohio’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:

Jeffrey K. Phillips, Esq.

Steptoe & Johnson, PLLC

1010 Monarch Street, Suite 250

Lexington, KY 40591-0810

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