Ezel / Agency Decisions / kent-96-305-c-alj
FMSHRC ALJ decision Docket KENT 96-305-C Decided October 21, 1996 Procedural Judge Gary Melick

Kermit Campbell v. John Chaney Trucking Co., Inc. and/or Watts and Chaney Trucking, Inc.

Kermit Campbell v. John Chaney Trucking Co., Inc. and/or Watts and Chaney Trucking, Inc. (FMSHRC KENT 96-305-C): Compensation case dismissed because no withdrawal order was issued

Apply this to your situation

This order from 1996 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 1996
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 order of an FMSHRC Administrative Law Judge
This order became a final decision of the Commission 40 days after issuance under 30 U.S.C. § 823(d)(1), unless the Commission directed review or a party sought judicial review. It 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

Kermit Campbell sought compensation under section 111 of the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act, saying a federal mine inspector inspected his truck and put it out of service. The application did not allege that a withdrawal order caused the idlement. Campbell later submitted a section 104(a) citation and said the inspector had not written a withdrawal order. Judge Gary Melick dismissed the case because section 111 compensation is available only when a withdrawal order was issued under the Act.

Decision snapshot

  • Governing provisions: 30 U.S.C. § 823(d)(1); 30 U.S.C. § 801
  • Outcome: The compensation proceeding was dismissed.
  • Key point: A section 111 compensation claim requires idlement caused by a withdrawal order, not merely a citation.

Full text (FMSHRC public release)

FEDERAL MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH REVIEW COMMISSION

               OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGES
                        2 SKYLINE, Suite 1000
                        5203 LEESBURG PIKE
                   FALLS CHURCH, VIRGINIA 22041

                       October 21, 1996

KERMIT CAMPBELL, : COMPENSATION PROCEEDING
Applicant :
v. : Docket No. KENT 96-305-C
:
JOHN CHANEY TRUCKING CO., INC.: Mine ID 15-13936 R10
and/or WATTS AND CHANEY : Star Fire Mine
TRUCKING, INC. :
Respondent :

                     ORDER OF DISMISSAL

Before: Judge Melick

 On July 18, 1996, the Applicant, Kermit Campbell, filed an

application for compensation under Section 111 of the Federal Mine
Safety and Health Act of 1977, 30 U.S.C. § 801 et. seq., the “Act”,
based upon alleged idlement because “Federal Mine Inspector
Frank Mayhew inspected and put my truck out of service”. It was
not alleged that a withdrawal order caused the idlement.
Section 111 of the Act authorizes entitlement to compensation
only following the issuance of a withdrawal order under the Act.
Accordingly the Applicant was ordered to show cause why his case
should not be dismissed.

 In response to the show cause order the Applicant submitted

a copy of the “Section 104(a)” citation which he maintains was
the basis for this application for compensation. Applicant
further stated that the inspector “neglected to write a
withdrawal order on the citation.”

 Under the circumstances, since the alleged idlement was not

the result of the issuance of an order under the Act, this case
must be dismissed.

                         Gary Melick
                         Administrative Law Judge

Page 2

Distribution:

Kermit Campbell, General Delivery, Rowdy, KY 41367

George J. Miller, Esq., Wyatt, Tarrant & Combs, 1700 Lexington
Financial Center, Lexington, KY 40507

/jf

Get today's answer for your situation

You just read what one judge decided for one employer in 1996, 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.