Crockett Collieries (KY) Inc. (ALJ decision, September 28, 1994)
Crockett Collieries (KY) Inc. (FMSHRC KENT 94-520): Settlement approved and $9,000 assessed
Apply this to your situation
This order from 1994 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.
Plain-English summary
Crockett Collieries (KY) Inc. and the Secretary proposed a settlement in a civil penalty proceeding. The settlement called for vacating one order, deleting the significant and substantial findings from two other orders, and reducing the proposed penalty from $26,700 to $9,000. The ALJ approved the settlement under the statutory penalty criteria and ordered payment of $9,000 within 30 days.
Decision snapshot
- Cited standard(s): The order cites 30 U.S.C. § 820(i), but does not identify a specific safety standard.
- Outcome: The settlement was approved, one order was vacated, two S&S findings were deleted, and the penalty was reduced to $9,000.
- Key point: The ALJ found the proposed settlement acceptable under the statutory penalty criteria.
Full text (FMSHRC public release)
CCASE:
SOL (MSHA) V. CROCKETT COLLIERIES
DDATE:
19940928
TTEXT:
Page 2
~1994
FEDERAL MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH REVIEW COMMISSION
OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGES
2 SKYLINE, 10th FLOOR
5203 LEESBURG PIKE
FALLS CHURCH, VIRGINIA 22041
SECRETARY OF LABOR,
: CIVIL PENALTY PROCEEDING
MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH : ADMINISTRATION (MSHA), : Docket No. KENT 94-520
Petitioner : A.C. No. 15-15455-03542
v. :
: Soladay Mine
CROCKETT COLLIERIES (KY) INC., :
Respondent :
DECISION APPROVING SETTLEMENT
Appearances: Joseph Luckett, Esq., Office of the Solicitor, U.S. Department of Labor, Nashville, Tennessee, for the Petitioner;
Joshua E. Santana, Esq., Brown, Bucalos, Santana and Bratt, P.S.C., Lexington, Kentucky, for the Respondent.
Before: Judge Melick
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). At hearings, Petitioner filed a motion to approve a settlement agree- ment and to dismiss the case. Vacation of Order No. 4245549, deletion of the "significant and substantial" findings from Order Nos. 3830240 and 4245405 and a reduction in penalty from $26,700 to $9,000 was proposed. I have considered the representations and documentation submitted in this case, and I conclude that the proffered settlement is acceptable 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 $9,000 within 30 days of this order.
Gary Melick
Administrative Law Judge
Page 3
~1995
Distribution:
Joseph B. Luckett, Esq., Office of the Solicitor, U.S. Department of Labor, 2002 Richard Jones Road, Suite B-201, Nashville, TN 37215-2862 (Certified Mail)
Joshua E. Santana, Esq., Brown, Bucalos, Santana & Bratt, P.S.C., 600 Lexington Building, 201 West Short St., Lexington, KY 40507 (Certified Mail)
/lh
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