Ezel / Agency Decisions / kent-87-3-alj
FMSHRC ALJ decision Docket KENT 87-3 Decided February 10, 1987 Settled Judge James A. Broderick Transcribed from scan

Marigold Docks, Inc.

Marigold Docks, Inc. (FMSHRC KENT 87-3): Civil penalty settlement approved

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 settlement order 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.
Transcribed from a scanned original: FMSHRC released this decision as an image-only file. The full text below is a machine transcription, proofread against the scan. Check the official release before quoting exact language.
Read the official release (fmshrc.gov)

Plain-English summary

Marigold Docks disputed whether a citation had properly been issued to it rather than to the deceased miner's employer. The parties agreed to resolve the civil penalty proceeding for $120 instead of the originally assessed $126. Judge James A. Broderick approved the settlement under the penalty criteria in section 110(i) of the Mine Act and ordered payment within 30 days.

Decision snapshot

  • Governing provision: 30 U.S.C. § 820(i)
  • Outcome: The settlement was approved, reducing the assessed penalty from $126 to $120.
  • Key point: A respondent may settle a disputed citation without conceding that it was the proper party to receive the citation.

Full text (FMSHRC public release)

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 87-3
PETITIONER A.C. No. 15-14291-03503

    v.                                Marigold Docks

MARIGOLD DOCKS, INC.,
RESPONDENT

                 DECISION APPROVING SETTLEMENT

Before: Judge Broderick

 On February 9, 1987, the parties filed a Joint Motion to

approve settlement in this case. The violations were originally
assessed at $126 and the parties propose to settle for $120.

 Respondent does not agree that the citation was properly

issued to it, rather than the employer of the deceased miner.
However, it agrees to the settlement of this case by the payment
of $120. I have considered the motion in the light of the
criteria in section 110(i) of the Act, and conclude that it
should be approved.

 Accordingly, the settlement is APPROVED and Respondent is

ORDERED TO PAY the sum of $120 within 30 days of the date of this
order.

                              James A. Broderick
                              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.