Rivco Dredging Corporation (ALJ decision, September 30, 1986)
Rivco Dredging Corporation (FMSHRC KENT 86-111): $40 penalty settlement approved
Apply this to your situation
This order from 1986 bound only the parties to this case; it isn't precedent. Ask about your situation and see what the current MSHA standards and Commission precedent say, with citations.
Plain-English summary
Rivco Dredging Corporation faced a civil penalty proceeding involving its River Dredge. The Secretary of Labor proposed a settlement reducing the penalty from $92 to $40. Judge Gary Melick reviewed the submissions under the Mine Act's penalty criteria and found the agreement appropriate. He approved the settlement and ordered Rivco to pay $40 within 30 days. The decision does not identify the underlying violation or safety standard.
Decision snapshot
- Cited provision(s): 30 U.S.C. §§ 815(d) and 820(i); the underlying safety standard is not identified.
- Outcome: The settlement reduced the penalty from $92 to $40, payable within 30 days.
- Key point: The judge approved the proposed reduction after applying the Mine Act penalty criteria.
Full text (FMSHRC public release)
CCASE:
SOL (MSHA) V. RIVCO DREDGING
DDATE:
19860930
TTEXT:
~1457
Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission Office of Administrative Law Judges
SECRETARY OF LABOR,
CIVIL PENALTY PROCEEDING
MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH
ADMINISTRATION (MSHA),
Docket No. KENT 86-111
PETITIONER
A.C. No. 15-12672-03504
v. River Dredge
RIVCO DREDGING CORPORATION,
RESPONDENT
DECISION APPROVING SETTLEMENT
Appearances: Mary K. Spencer, Esq., Office of the Solicitor, U.S. Department of Labor, Arlington, Virginia, for Petitioner;
Mr. Gene A. Wilson, President, Rivco Dredging Corporation, Louisa, Kentucky, for Respondent.
Before: Judge Melick
This case is before me upon a petition for assessment of civil penalty under Section 105(d) of the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977 (the Act). Petitioner has filed a motion to approve a settlement agreement and to dismiss the case. A reduction in penalty from $92 to $40 is proposed. I have considered the representations and documentation submitted in this case, and I conclude that the proffered settlement is appropriate under the criteria set forth in Section 110(i) of the Act.
WHEREFORE, the motion for approval of settlement is GRANTED, and it is ORDERED that Respondent pay a penalty of $40 within 30 days of this order.
Gary Melick
Administrative Law Judge
What applies to your situation today?
This order bound one employer. Ezel checks the current MSHA standards and Commission precedent against your facts, 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