Sulphur Springs Stone Company

Plain-English summary

Sulphur Springs Stone Company operated a small stone mine in Kentucky with five employees. After the company did not appear at the hearing, Judge James A. Broderick reviewed the Secretary's evidence concerning 26 alleged violations found during an October 8, 1985 inspection. The violations included missing guards, exposed electrical parts, inadequate protective equipment, missing berms, unsafe traffic and access conditions, and other mine-safety problems. The Judge found every violation established and affirmed all citations, assessing a total of $1,530 in civil penalties. The decision states that the mine was no longer operating and that the Secretary stipulated the company made reasonable efforts to achieve compliance after the citations were issued.

Decision snapshot

• Cited standards: 30 C.F.R. Part 56 standards concerning equipment guarding, electrical safety, protective equipment, berms, explosives-area controls, haulage, and access.
• Outcome: All 26 citations were affirmed, with a combined civil penalty of $1,530.
• Key point: The ALJ found the violations established from the Secretary's evidence after the operator defaulted at the hearing, then set individual penalties based on seriousness, exposure, negligence, and the operator's circumstances.

Full text (FMSHRC public release)

CCASE:
SOL (MSHA) V. SULPHER GAS
DDATE:
19870409
TTEXT:

Page 2

~719

           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 86-32-M
PETITIONER A.C. No. 15-14035-05502

    v.                               Docket No. KENT 86-39-M
                                     A.C. No. 15-14035-05501

SULPHUR SPRINGS STONE
COMPANY, No. 1 Mine
RESPONDENT

                               DECISION

Appearances: Joseph Luckett, Esq., Office of the Solicitor,
U.S. Department of Labor, Nashville, Tennessee,
for Petitioner;
There was no appearance for Respondent.

Before: Judge Broderick

STATEMENT OF THE CASE

 In these proceedings, the Secretary seeks civil penalties

for a total of 26 alleged violations of mandatory health and
safety standards, all being issued during an inspection on
October 8, 1985. Respondent by Bill J. Morse, President, filed
answers to the petitions. I issued a notice of hearing on January
7, 1987, scheduling the cases for hearing in Owensboro, Kentucky
on March 3, 1987. According to the postal return receipt in the
file, the notice was received by Bill J. Morse on January 9,
1987. When the case was called for hearing on March 3, 1987, no
one appeared for Respondent. An attempt was made by Petitioner's
representative to contact Mr. Morse by telephone but was
unsuccessful. I found Respondent in default, and directed the
Secretary to submit evidence concerning the alleged violations,
and concerning the questions of gravity and negligence. Eric
Shanholtz testified on behalf of the Secretary. Posthearing
briefs were not filed. On the basis of the entire record, I make
the following decision.

Page 3

~720
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW COMMON TO ALL ALLEGED
VIOLATIONS

 1. In 1985, Respondent was the owner and operator of a stone

mine in Ohio County, Kentucky, known as the No. 1 Mine.
Respondent was subject to the provisions of the Federal Mine
Safety and Health Act (the Act) in the operation of the mine.

 2. In 1985, Respondent produced 13,557 tons of stone for a

gross dollar amount of $33,892. Five people were employed at the
mine. This was the only mine operated by Respondent. Respondent
was a small operator.

 3. No citations were issued by MSHA to Respondent in the two

years prior to October 8, 1985.

 4. The mine is no longer in operation. Respondent submitted

by mail a copy of what purports to be a 1984 federal income tax
return, showing a loss of $62,680 on gross receipts of $43,893.

 5. The Secretary has stipulated that Respondent made

reasonable efforts to achieve compliance after the citations were
issued.

FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS RELATED TO EACH CITATION DOCKET NO.
KENT 86Ä39-M

CITATION 2657202

 The citation charged a violation of 30 C.F.R.   56.13021

because safety chains were not being used on the 2 inch hose
going from a compressor to a track drill. The drill was in
operation with 90 pounds air pressure. The violation was
established, was moderately serious, in that it could have
injured employees in the area. The violation was obvious and
therefore resulted from Respondent's negligence. I conclude that
an appropriate penalty for the violation is $100.

CITATION 2657221

 This citation charged a violation of 30 C.F.R.    56.14001

because the VÄBelt drive to the discharge conveyor was not
guarded. The mill was in operation. The exposed belt was
approximately 4 feet from ground level. The violation was
established, and was moderately serious, in that it could have
resulted in an injury to an employee. The violation was evident
and therefore resulted from Respondent's negligence. I conclude
that an appropriate penalty for the violation is $100.

Page 4

~721
CITATION 2657222

 This citation charged a violation of 30 C.F.R.    56.12032

because a make up box cover was not provided for the drive motor
to the discharge conveyor of the hammer mill. The violation was
established. It was not serious but resulted from negligence
since it was evident. I conclude that an appropriate penalty for
the violation is $20.

CITATION 2657223

 This citation charged a violation of 30 C.F.R.   56.14003

because the head pulley for the feed conveyor to the secondary
screen was inadequately guarded. The conveyor was in operation.
There was a walkway adjacent. The pinch point was approximately
30 inches from floor level. The violation was established. It
was not serious because of low employee exposure. The operator
should have known of the violation. Therefore, it resulted from
negligence. I conclude that an appropriate penalty for the
violation is $30.

CITATION 2657224

 This citation charged a violation of 30 C.F.R.   56.1203

because a 110 volt energized receptacle in the electrical shack
had a broken face, exposing energized parts. The receptacle was
approximately 3 feet from floor level. The violation was
established. It was serious because employees could have touched
the energized parts. It was evident and, therefore resulted from
Respondent's negligence. I conclude that an appropriate penalty
for the violation is $100.

CITATION 2657225

 This citation charged a violation of 30 C.F.R.   56.14001

because three stacking conveyor tail pulleys were not guarded.
They were accessible to employees and were at ground level. The
violation was established. It was moderately serious because of
the possibility of serious injury. Respondent should have been
aware of the condition. I conclude that an appropriate penalty
for the violation is $100.

CITATION 2657226

 This citation charged a violation of 30 C.F.R.   56.14035

because a V-belt drive to a conveyor was inadequately guarded.
Pinch points, 3 feet from ground level, were accessible to
employees. The belt was in operation. The violation was
established. It was moderately serious because serious injury
could occur. The operator should have been aware of the

Page 5

~722
condition. I conclude that an appropriate penalty for the
violation is $100.

CITATION 2657228

 This citation charged a violation of 30 C.F.R.   56.14001

because the take-up pulley to a rock conveyor was not guarded.
There was an exposed pinch point approximately 3 feet from ground
level. It was moderately serious because of the likelihood of
injury. The condition was evident. I conclude that an appropriate
penalty for the violation is $100.

CITATION 2657227

 This citation charged a violation of 30 C.F.R.   56.12032

because a drive motor for a rock conveyor was not provided with a
makeup box cover. The motor was 6 to 8 feet high and there was
low employee exposure. The violation was established. It was not
serious. I conclude that an appropriate penalty for the violation
is $20.

CITATION 2657229

 This citation charged a violation of 30 C.F.R.   56.12032

because a drive motor for another rock conveyor was not provided
with a makeup box cover. There was low employee exposure. The
violation was established. It was not serious. I conclude that an
appropriate penalty for the violation is $20.

DOCKET NO. KENT 86Ä32-M

CITATION 2657203
This citation charged a violation of 30 C.F.R. 56.5003
because an employer was drilling without using the water system
thus exposing him to dust. The possibility of injury or disease
resulting was not high. The violation was not serious. I conclude
that $20 is an appropriate penalty for this violation.

CITATION 2657204

 This citation charged a violation of 30 C.F.R.    56.15002

because employees were working in the pit and crusher area
without hard hats. Hazards in the form of falling rock and
flyrock existed in the area. The practice was likely to result in
injury. The operator should have been aware of the practice. The
violation was established and was moderately serious. I conclude
that $75 is an appropriate penalty for this violation.

Page 6

~723
CITATION 2657205

 This citation charged a violation of 30 C.F.R.   56.15003

because an employee was observed drilling without adequate foot
protection. The practice was likely to result in injury. the
operator should have been aware of the practice. The violation
was established and was moderately serious. I conclude that $75
is an appropriate penalty for this violation.

CITATION 2657206

 This citation charged a violation of 30 C.F.R.   56.9002

because berms were not provided along the upper bench of the pit,
the elevated road leading from the upper bench, and the elevated
ramp leading to the crusher charging bin. Front end loaders and
dump trucks were operating in these areas. The condition was
reasonably likely to result in serious injury. The operator was
aware or should have been aware of the condition. The violation
was established and was serious. I conclude that $125 is an
appropriate penalty for this violation.

CITATION 2657207

 This citation charged a violation of 30 C.F.R.

56.4230(a)(1) because three diesel powered pieces of equipment
were not provided with fire extinguishers. The violation was
established. It was not serious. I conclude that $20 is an
appropriate penalty for this violation.

CITATION 2657209

 This citation charged a violation of 30 C.F.R.    56.6005

because dry grass about two feet high surrounded the powder
magazine. The condition was not deemed likely to result in injury
because of little employee exposure. The violation was
established but was not serious. I conclude that $20 is an
appropriate penalty for this violation.

CITATION 2657210

 This citation charged a violation of 30 C.F.R.   56.6020(i)

because suitable danger signs were not posted at the magazine.
The condition was unlikely to result in injury. The violation was
established and was not serious. I conclude that $20 is an
appropriate penalty.

CITATION 2657211

 This citation charged a violation of 30 C.F.R.   56.9002

because an outside mirror was missing from a haul truck. The

Page 7

~724
absence of the mirror was unlikely to result in injury. The
violation was established and was not serious. I conclude that
$20 is an appropriate penalty.

CITATION 2657212

 This citation charged a violation of 30 C.F.R.   56.9087

because two haul trucks were not provided with back-up alarms,
although the operator's view to the rear was obstructed. Foot
traffic in the area was low. The violation was established and
was not serious. I conclude that $20 is an appropriate penalty.

CITATION 2657213

 This citation charged a violation of 30 C.F.R.   56.14001

because the main shaft for the crusher protruded and provided a
pinch point accessible to employees. The crusher was operating.
There was a walkway beside the crusher. The condition could
result in serious injury. It was evident and the operator should
have been aware of it. The violation was established and was
moderately serious. I conclude that $100 is an appropriate
penalty.

CITATION 2657214

 This citation charged a violation of 30 C.F.R.   56.14001

because several V-belt drives on the impact crusher were
unguarded. They were 4 to 5 feet from ground level and were
accessible to employees. There was foot traffic in the area. The
condition was likely to result in serious injury and should have
been known to the operator. The violation was established and was
moderately serious. I conclude that $100 is an appropriate
penalty.

CITATION 2657215

 This citation charged a violation of 30 C.F.R.   56.11012

because of an unguarded opening in the bin by the impact crusher.
The bin was about 8 feet deep and was empty. There was foot
traffic in the area. The condition was likely to result in injury
and the operator should have been aware of it. The violation was
established and was moderately serious. I conclude that $75 is an
appropriate penalty.

CITATION 2657217

 This citation charged a violation of 30 C.F.R.   56.14001

because a V-belt drive to the primary shaker screen was
unguarded. The inspector deemed an injury unlikely because of low
employee exposure. The condition was evident. The violation was

Page 8

~725
established. It was not serious. I conclude that $30 is an
appropriate penalty.

CITATION 2657218

 This citation charged a violation of 30 C.F.R.   56.14001

because the tail pulley to the waste rock conveyor was unguarded.
A walkway made the exposed pulley accessible to employees. It was
approximately 2 feet from floor level. The inspector deemed an
injury unlikely because of low employee exposure. The operator
should have been aware of the condition. The violation was
established and was not serious. I conclude that $30 is an
appropriate penalty.

CITATION 2657219

 This citation charged a violation of 30 C.F.R.   56.14007

because of an inadequate guard on the V-belt drive to the
crusher-hammer mill. Two pinch points existed above 30 inches
from the floor. The inspector deemed an injury unlikely. The
operator should have been aware of the condition. The violation
was established but was not serious. I conclude that $30 is an
appropriate penalty.

CITATION 2657220

 The citation charged a violation of 30 C.F.R.   56.11001

because three conveyors were not adequately provided with
handrails. The conveyors were approximately 20 feet from ground
level and were used as access to service the head pulleys. The
condition was reasonably likely to result in injury and should
have been known to Respondent. The violation was established and
was moderately serious. I conclude that $80 is an appropriate
penalty.
ORDER

 Based on the above findings of fact and conclusions of law

IT IS ORDERED:

 1. The citations are AFFIRMED.

 2. Respondent shall, within 30 days of the date of this

decision, pay the following civil penalties for violations found
herein.

        CITATION                     PENALTY

        2657202                      $100
        2657221                       100
        2657222                        20
        2657223                        30
        2657224                       100
        2657225                       100
        2657226                       100
        2657228                       100
        2657227                        20

Page 9

2657229 20
2657203 20
2657204 75
2657205 75
2657206 125
2657207 20
2657209 20
2657210 20
2657211 20
2657212 20
2657213 100
2657214 100
2657215 75
2657217 30
2657218 30
2657219 30
2657220 80
-------
Total $1530

Page 10

~726
James A. Broderick
Administrative Law Judge