Rivco Dredging Corporation (ALJ decision, September 30, 1986)

Rivco Dredging Corporation (FMSHRC KENT 86-111): $40 penalty settlement approved

Decision type
ALJ decision
Docket
KENT 86-111
Decided
September 30, 1986
Presiding judge
Outcome
Settled
Precedential status
Final order, not precedent
Checked against source
2026-10-19

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.

Currency note: this decision dates from 1986
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.
Final ALJ decision, not Commission precedent
This decision became final under the 40-day rule in 30 U.S.C. § 823(d)(1) because no later Commission review appears in the official index. It binds the parties but is not Commission precedent. 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 agency's own release.
Read the official release (fmshrc.gov)

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