Secretary of Labor v. Heidelberg Materials Midwest Agg. Inc.

Plain-English summary

Heidelberg Materials asked the Commission to reopen a proposed penalty assessment that had become final when no contest was filed within 30 days. The company said a payment check had been sent but returned to its corporate office without being delivered to MSHA. It later reissued the check, and MSHA received full payment. Because Heidelberg Materials no longer sought to contest the violations, the Commission found that no Rule 60(b) relief was needed and dismissed the reopening request as moot.

Decision snapshot

• Cited authority: 30 U.S.C. § 815(a)
• Outcome: The motion to reopen was dismissed as moot after the penalty was paid in full.
• Key point: Full payment and the absence of any continuing contest eliminated the need to reopen the final assessment.

Full text (FMSHRC public release)

July 17, 2026

SECRETARY OF LABOR MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH ADMINISTRATION (MSHA) v. HEIDELBERG MATERIALS MIDWEST AGG. INC.

Docket No. LAKE 2025-0260 A.C. No. 11-00070-614881

BEFORE: Rajkovich, Chair; Jordan, and Baker, Commissioners

ORDER

BY THE COMMISSION:

This matter arises under the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977, 30 U.S.C.

§ 801 et seq. (2024) (“Mine Act”). On June 3, 2025, the Commission received from Heidelberg Materials Midwest Agg. Inc. (“Heidelberg Materials”) a motion seeking to reopen a penalty assessment that had appeared to become a final order of the Commission pursuant to section 105(a) of the Mine Act, 30 U.S.C. § 815(a).

On February 25, 2025, Heidelberg Materials received a proposed penalty assessment from the Secretary. On March 27, 2025, the proposed assessment was deemed a final order of the Commission, when it appeared that the operator had not filed a Notice of Contest within 30 days.

Heidelberg Materials asserts that it requested on February 11, 2025 that its corporate office issue a check for this statement. The request was approved and sent, but

apparently never received by MSHA. It came to the operator’s attention that the check was not received when it received a letter on May 19, 2025. Upon receiving the letter, Heidelberg checked shipment tracking and saw that the check was returned to its corporate office. It then sought to have the check re-issued. MSHA has since received the check, and the payment was received in full. The Secretary argues that the motion to reopen is moot because the operator has paid the penalty in full and does not seek to pursue contesting the violations.

Having reviewed Heidelberg Materials’ request and the Secretary’s response, we conclude that the operator has paid the penalty in full, which obviates any need to invoke Rule

60(b). Accordingly, the operator’s motion to reopen is moot and this proceeding dismissed.

Mary Lu Jordan, Commissioner

Timothy J. Baker, Commissioner

Marco M. Rajkovich, Jr., Chair

Distribution:

Scott Peters

Heidelberg Materials Agg. Inc. Romeoville Quarry-U836

125 N. Independence Blvd. Romeoville, IL 60446 [email protected]

Jennifer A. Ledig, Esq. Alexandra J. Gilewicz, Esq. Thomas A. Paige, Esq.

Office of the Solicitor

U.S. Department of Labor

Division of Mine Safety and Health

200 Constitution Avenue NW, Suite N4428 Washington, DC 20210 [email protected] [email protected] [email protected]

Melanie Garris

US Department of Labor/MSHA Office of Assessments, Room N3454 200 Constitution Ave NW Washington, DC 20210 [email protected] [email protected]

Acting Chief Judge David P. Simonton

Federal Mine Safety Health Review Commission 1331 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Suite 520N Washington, DC 20004-1710 [email protected]