Mustang Fuels Corporation (ALJ decision, December 6, 1991)

Mustang Fuels Corporation (FMSHRC KENT 91-100): Civil penalty settlement approved

Decision type
ALJ decision
Docket
KENT 91-100
Decided
December 6, 1991
Presiding judge
Outcome
Settled
Precedential status
Final order, not precedent
Checked against source
2026-08-15

Apply this to your situation

This order from 1991 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 1991
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 approving a settlement, 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

Mustang Fuels Corporation faced a civil penalty proceeding under the Mine Act. The parties asked the judge to approve a settlement and dismiss the case. Judge Roy J. Maurer approved a reduction of the proposed penalty from $450 to $175 and ordered Mustang Fuels to pay $175 within 30 days. The decision found the settlement appropriate under the statutory penalty criteria.

Decision snapshot

  • Governing provisions: 30 U.S.C. §§ 815(d) and 820(i)
  • Outcome: The settlement was approved, the penalty was reduced to $175, and payment was ordered within 30 days.
  • Key point: The ALJ approved a negotiated civil penalty reduction after reviewing the parties' representations and documentation.

Full text (FMSHRC public release)

+CCASE:
SOL (MSHA) V. MUSTANG FUELS
DDATE:
19911206
TTEXT:


Page 2

~1888
Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission (F.M.S.H.R.C.) Office of Administrative Law Judges

SECRETARY OF LABOR,
CIVIL PENALTY PROCEEDING
MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH
ADMINISTRATION (MSHA),
Docket No. KENT 91-100
PETITIONER
A. C. No. 15-16901-03502

v. No. 1 Mine

MUSTANG FUELS CORPORATION,
RESPONDENT

DECISION APPROVING SETTLEMENT

Before: Judge Maurer

This case is before me upon a petition for assessment of civil penalty under Section 105(d) of the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977 (the Act). The parties have filed a motion to approve a settlement agreement and to dismiss the case. A reduction in penalty from $450 to $175 is proposed. I have considered the representations and documentation submitted in this case, and I conclude that the proffered settlement is appropriate under the criteria set forth in Section 110(i) of the Act.

WHEREFORE, the motion for approval of settlement is GRANTED, and it is ORDERED that respondent pay a penalty of $175 within 30 days of this order.

Roy J. Maurer
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