Secretary of Labor v. King James Coal Company, Inc. (ALJ decision, July 29, 1985)

Plain-English summary

MSHA sought $236 for eight alleged safety violations by King James Coal Company in two civil penalty cases. The company did not provide requested financial information or respond to an order asking why it should not be held in default. Judge George A. Koutras found it in default and used the Commission's summary disposition procedure. He assessed the proposed penalties for all eight citations: $216 in KENT 84-198 and $20 in KENT 84-199. The order required payment within 30 days and did not analyze the underlying conditions for each citation.

Decision snapshot

• Cited standards: 30 C.F.R. §§ 75.316, 75.1722(b), 75.313, 75.1719-1(d), 75.1100-2(e)(2), 75.1101, and 75.400.
• Outcome: Eight citations affirmed by default; $236 total penalties assessed.
• Key point: The operator's failure to respond to the judge's show-cause order led to final assessment of MSHA's proposed penalties.

Full text (FMSHRC public release)

CCASE:
SOL (MSHA) v. KING JAMES COAL
DDATE:
19850729
TTEXT:
~1102
Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission Office of Administrative Law Judges

SECRETARY OF LABOR,
CIVIL PENALTY PROCEEDINGS
MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH
ADMINISTRATION (MSHA),
Docket No. KENT 84-198
PETITIONER
A.C. No. 15-12977-03508
v.
Docket No. KENT 84-199
KING JAMES COAL COMPANY, INC., A.C. No. 15-12977-03510 RESPONDENT

SUMMARY DECISIONS AND ORDERS

Before: Judge Koutras

Statement of the Proceedings

These proceedings concern civil penalty proposals filed by the petitioner against the respondent pursuant to section 110(a) of the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977, 30 U.S.C. 820(a), seeking civil penalty assessments in the amount of $236 for eight alleged violations of certain mandatory safety standards found in Part 75, Title 30, Code of Federal Regulations.

These cases have been pending in the Commission since August, 1984, and they were recently reassigned to me for adjudication. In view of the respondent's failure to communicate with the petitioner's counsel concerning its present whereabouts, and its failure to submit certain documentation concerning its financial condition, I issued an Order on June 13, 1985, requiring the parties to show cause as to why the respondent should not be held in default and the cases disposed of by summary order pursuant to 29 C.F.R. 2700.63, assessing MSHA's proposed civil penalties as final.

Discussion

The respondent has failed to respond to the petitioner's request to furnish information concerning its financial condition, and has also failed to respond to my previous order concerning the proposed disposition of these cases. Under the circumstances, I conclude and find that the respondent is in default, and that these proceedings may be disposed of pursuant to the Commission's summary disposition procedures found in 29 C.F.R. 2700.63.
~1103
ORDER

In view of the respondent's default, and pursuant to the provisions of 29 C.F.R. 2700.63(b), the respondent is assessed civil penalties for the violations in question, as follows:

KENT 84-198

Citation No.       Date      30 C.F.R. Section      Assessment

    2294251       2/23/84         75.316              $ 20
    2294252       2/27/84         75.1722(b)            39
    2294254       2/27/84         75.313                20
    2294255       2/27/84         75.1719-1(d)          20
    2294256       2/27/84         75.1100-2(e)(2)       39
    2294257       2/27/84         75.1101               39
    2294258       2/27/84         75.400                39

$216

KENT 84-199

Citation No. Date 30 C.F.R. Section Assessment

2294253 2/27/84 75.1719-1(d) $ 20

Respondent IS ORDERED to pay civil penalties in the amounts shown above for the violations in question, and payment is to be made to the petitioner within thirty (30) days of the date of this order.

George A. Koutras
Administrative Law Judge