Ezel / Agency Decisions / KENT 87-172

Green River Coal Company (ALJ decision, October 5, 1987)

Green River Coal Company (FMSHRC KENT 87-172 and related dockets): Settlement approved, citations vacated, and contests dismissed

Decision type
ALJ decision
Dockets
KENT 87-172, KENT 87-173, KENT 87-99-R, KENT 87-100-R, KENT 87-101-R, KENT 87-102-R, KENT 87-103-R, KENT 87-104-R, KENT 87-105-R, KENT 87-106-R, KENT 87-107-R, KENT 87-108-R, KENT 87-109-R, KENT 87-110-R, KENT 87-111-R, KENT 87-112-R, KENT 87-113-R, KENT 87-114-R, KENT 87-115-R, KENT 87-116-R, KENT 87-117-R, KENT 87-118-R, KENT 87-119-R, KENT 87-120-R, KENT 87-121-R, KENT 87-122-R, KENT 87-123-R, KENT 87-124-R, KENT 87-125-R, KENT 87-126-R, KENT 87-127-R, KENT 87-128-R, KENT 87-129-R, KENT 87-130-R, KENT 87-131-R, KENT 87-132-R, KENT 87-133-R, KENT 87-134-R, KENT 87-135-R, KENT 87-136-R, KENT 87-137-R
Decided
October 5, 1987
Presiding judge
Avram Weisberger
Outcome
Mixed result
Precedential status
Final order, not precedent
Checked against source
2026-08-20
Cited standards
30 U.S.C. § 820(i) 30 C.F.R. § 50.20
Official source
Read the official release (fmshrc.gov)
PDF
View Official PDF

Apply this to your situation

This order from 1987 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 1987
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

Green River Coal Company had related contest and civil penalty proceedings involving citations and alleged reporting violations. The parties proposed reducing the total penalties from $7,800 to $950. Judge Avram Weisberger found the agreed penalties appropriate under the Mine Act's penalty criteria and approved the settlement. He also vacated 20 citations because they did not involve reportable accidents or occupational injuries under 30 C.F.R. § 50.20, then dismissed the listed contests.

Decision snapshot

  • Cited standards: 30 U.S.C. § 820(i); 30 C.F.R. § 50.20.
  • Outcome: The settlement was approved, the penalty was reduced to $950, 20 citations were vacated, and the contests were dismissed.
  • Key point: The order combined settlement approval with vacation of citations that did not meet the reporting requirements.

Full text (FMSHRC public release)

CCASE:
GREEN COAL V. SOL (MSHA)
DDATE:
19871005
TTEXT:

Page 2

~1715

Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission Office of Administrative Law Judges

GREEN RIVER COAL COMPANY,
CONTEST PROCEEDINGS
CONTESTANT
Docket No. KENT 87-99-R
v. Citation No. 9897101; 2/27/87

SECRETARY OF LABOR,
Docket No. KENT 87-100-R
MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH
Citation No. 9897102; 2/27/87
ADMINISTRATION (MSHA),
RESPONDENT Docket No. KENT 87-101-R Citation No. 9897103; 2/27/87

Docket No. KENT 87-102-R
Citation No. 9897104; 2/27/87

Docket No. KENT 87-103-R
Citation No. 9897105; 2/27/87

Docket No. KENT 87-104-R
Citation No. 9897106; 2/27/87

Docket No. KENT 87-105-R
Citation No. 9897107; 2/27/87

Docket No. KENT 87-106-R
Citation No. 9897108; 2/27/87

Docket No. KENT 87-107-R
Citation No. 9897109; 2/27/87

Docket No. KENT 87-108-R
Citation No. 9897110; 2/27/87

Docket No. KENT 87-109-R
Citation No. 9897111; 2/27/87

Docket No. KENT 87-110-R
Citation No. 9897112; 2/27/87

Docket No. KENT 87-111-R
Citation No. 9897113; 2/27/87

Docket No. KENT 87-112-R
Citation No. 9897114; 2/27/87

Docket No. KENT 87-113-R
Citation No. 9897115; 2/27/87

Docket No. KENT 87-114-R
Citation No. 9897116; 2/27/87

Docket No. KENT 87-115-R
Citation No. 9897117; 2/27/87

Page 3

Docket No. KENT 87-116-R
Citation No. 9897118; 2/27/87

Docket No. KENT 87-117-R
Citation No. 9897119; 2/27/87

Docket No. KENT 87-118-R
Citation No. 9897120; 2/27/87

Docket No. KENT 87-119-R
Citation No. 9897121; 2/27/87

Docket No. KENT 87-120-R
Citation No. 9897122; 2/27/87

Docket No. KENT 87-121-R
Citation No. 9897123; 2/27/87

Docket No. KENT 87-122-R
Citation No. 9897124; 2/27/87

Docket No. KENT 87-123-R
Citation No. 9897125; 2/27/87

Docket No. KENT 87-124-R
Citation No. 9897126; 2/27/87

Docket No. KENT 87-125-R
Citation No. 9897127; 2/27/87

Docket No. KENT 87-126-R
Citation No. 9897128; 2/27/87

Docket No. KENT 87-127-R
Citation No. 9897129; 2/27/87

Docket No. KENT 87-128-R
Citation No. 9897130; 2/27/87

Docket No. KENT 87-129-R
Citation No. 9897131; 2/27/87

Docket No. KENT 87-130-R
Citation No. 9897132; 2/27/87

Docket No. KENT 87-131-R
Citation No. 9897133; 2/27/87

Docket No. KENT 87-132-R
Citation No. 9897134; 2/27/87

Docket No. KENT 87-133-R
Citation No. 9897135; 2/27/87

Docket No. KENT 87-134-R
Citation No. 9897136; 2/27/87

Page 4

Docket No. KENT 87-135-R
Citation No. 9897137; 2/27/87

Docket No. KENT 87-136-R
Citation No. 9897138; 2/27/87

Docket No. KENT 87-137-R
Citation No. 9897139; 2/27/87

SECRETARY OF LABOR,
CIVIL PENALTY PROCEEDINGS
MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH
ADMINISTRATION (MSHA),
Docket No. KENT 87-172
PETITIONER
A.C. No. 15-13469-03602
v.
Docket No. KENT 87-173
GREEN RIVER COAL COMPANY,
A.C. No. 15-13469-03603
RESPONDENT

DECISION APPROVING SETTLEMENT
AND ORDER OF DISMISSAL

Before: Judge Weisberger

These cases are before me based on Notices of Contest filed by the Petitioner. The Secretary subsequently filed proposals for assessments of the Civil Penalties.

Both Parties filed a Joint Motion to Approve Settlement on September 23, 1987. The Motion proposed a reduction in total Penalties from $7,800 to $950. I have considered the documentation submitted in these cases, especially the representations of mitigating factors contained in paragraph 4. of the Motion and paragraphs 5. and 7. of Dave Harper's affidavit. I conclude that the proffered penalties agreed upon are appropriate under the criteria set forth in Section 110(i) of the Act.

Page 5

~1717
The Joint Motion also set forth a settlement agreement that 20 of the contested citations be vacated on the ground that they are not violations of the reporting requirements (30 C.F.R. 50.20), as they do not meet the definition of a reportable "accident", or "occupational injury". I have considered the documentation in these cases, especially paragraphs 3. and 5. of the Joint Motion, paragraph 6. of Dave Harper's affidavit, and Exhibit "A" attached to Dave Harper's affidavit. I conclude that it is proper to vacate the 20 citations referred to in the Motion.

Wherefore, the Joint Motion to Approve Settlement is GRANTED, and it is ORDERED that Petitioner (Operator) pay a penalty of $950, within 30 days of this Order. It is further ORDERED that the following citations be VACATED:

9897101 9897128
9897104 9897129
9897112 9897130
9897114 9897131
9897115 9897133
9897117 9897134
9897119 9897135
9897120 9897137
9897122 9897138
9897125 9897139

It is further ORDERED that the above captioned Notices of Contest be DISMISSED.

Avram Weisberger
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