Ezel / Agency Decisions / KENT 89-4-D

Southern Hills Mining (ALJ decision, March 10, 1989)

Southern Hills Mining (FMSHRC KENT 89-4-D): Discrimination case dismissed after no response

Decision type
ALJ decision
Docket
KENT 89-4-D
Decided
March 10, 1989
Presiding judge
Paul Merlin
Outcome
Procedural
Precedential status
Final order, not precedent
Checked against source
2026-08-17
Cited standards
30 U.S.C. § 815(c)
Official source
Read the official release (fmshrc.gov)
PDF
View Official PDF

Apply this to your situation

This order from 1989 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 1989
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
The judge dismissed the discrimination case after the complainant failed to respond to a show-cause order requesting information about the complaint. It 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

Gary Smith filed a discrimination complaint against Southern Hills Mining concerning Mine No. 2. The judge later ordered Smith to provide information about the complaint or explain why he had not done so. The order was delivered by certified mail, but Smith did not respond. Chief Administrative Law Judge Paul Merlin dismissed the case.

Decision snapshot

  • Cited standard(s): 30 U.S.C. § 815(c), the Mine Act discrimination provision identified in the order as section 105(c).
  • Outcome: The discrimination case was dismissed.
  • Key point: Failure to respond to a properly served show-cause order led to dismissal.

Full text (FMSHRC public release)

CCASE:
GARY SMITH V. SOUTHERN HILLS MINING
DDATE:
19890310
TTEXT:

Page 2

~345

FEDERAL MINE SAFETY & HEALTH REVIEW COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C.
March 10, 1989

GARY SMITH,
DISCRIMINATION PROCEEDING
Complainant
v. Docket No. KENT 89-4-D
BARB CD 88-55

SOUTHERN HILLS MINING, Mine No. 2 Respondent

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

Before: Judge Merlin

On October 11, 1988, you filed with this Commission a complaint of discrimination under section 105(c) of the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977. On December 23, 1988, a show cause order was issued directing you to provide information regarding your complaint or show good reason for your failure to do so. The show cause was mailed to you certified mail, return receipt requested and the file contains the receipt card indicating you received the show cause order. You have however, not responded and complied with the show cause order.

Accordingly, this case is DISMISSED.

Paul Merlin
Chief Administrative Law Judge

Distribution:

Mr. Gary Wayne Smith, P. 0. Box 171, Hazard, KY 41701 (Certified Mail)

Southern Hills Mining Company, Inc., P. 0. Box 730, Hindman, KY 41822 (Certified Mail)

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