Ezel / Agency Decisions / kent-87-172-alj
FMSHRC ALJ decision Docket 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 Mixed result Judge Avram Weisberger

Green River Coal Company

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

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

Get today's answer for your situation

You just read what one judge decided for one employer in 1987, and it binds only those parties. Ezel checks the current MSHA standards and Commission precedent and answers your specific situation, with citations.

Opens in Ezel Pro. Every answer cites the authority it relies on.