Ezel / Agency Decisions / kent-92-547-d-alj
FMSHRC ALJ decision Docket KENT 92-547-D Decided March 26, 1993 Settled Judge David Barbour

Adena Fuels, Incorporated

Gary L. Day v. Adena Fuels, Incorporated (FMSHRC KENT 92-547-D): Discrimination complaint dismissed under settlement

Apply this to your situation

This order from 1993 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 1993
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

Gary L. Day brought a discrimination complaint against Adena Fuels, Incorporated involving the Diamond No. 1 Mine. The parties reached a settlement and jointly moved to dismiss the complaint. Judge David Barbour found no reason to deny the motion and dismissed the matter. The settlement agreement was confidential and placed under seal at the parties' request.

Decision snapshot

  • Cited standard(s): None stated in the release.
  • Outcome: The discrimination complaint was dismissed based on the parties' settlement agreement.
  • Key point: A jointly agreed settlement can resolve a Mine Act discrimination proceeding without placing the confidential agreement in the public record.

Full text (FMSHRC public release)

CCASE:
GARY DAY V. ADENA FUELS
DDATE:
19930326
TTEXT:

Page 2

~555

    FEDERAL MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH REVIEW COMMISSION

            OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGES
                   2 SKYLINE, 10th FLOOR
                    5203 LEESBURG PIKE
               FALLS CHURCH, VIRGINIA 22041

GARY L. DAY, : DISCRIMINATION PROCEEDING
Complainant :
: Docket No. KENT 92-547-D
v. : BARB CD 92-15
:
ADENA FUELS, INCORPORATED, : Diamond No. 1 Mine
Respondent :

                    ORDER OF DISMISSAL

 Counsel for the parties have agreed to settle this matter,

and counsels have moved jointly to dismiss Complainant's
discrimination complaint on the basis of the settlement
agreement. The record reveals no reason why their motion should
not be granted. ACCORDINGLY, this matter is
DISMISSED.(Footnote 1)

                           David Barbour
                           Administrative Law Judge
                           (703) 756-6200

Distribution:

Tony Oppegard, Esq., Mine Safety Project of the Appalachian
Research and Defense Fund of Kentucky, Inc., 630 Maxwelton Court,
Lexington, KY 40508 (Certified Mail)

Mr. Gary Lee Day, HC 65, Box 494, Similax, KY 41764 (Certified
Mail)

Jerry Wayne Slone, Esq., Weinberg & Campbell, Adena Fuels, Inc.,
P.O. Box 727, Main Street, Hindman, KY 41822 (Certified Mail)

epy

1 The settlement agreement is confidential and the parties have requested
that it not be made part of the record of this proceeding. Therefore, with
the concurrence of counsel, the agreement has been placed under seal in the
official file.

Get today's answer for your situation

You just read what one judge decided for one employer in 1993, 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.