Quarto Mining Company (ALJ decision, January 5, 1981)
Quarto Mining Company (FMSHRC LAKE 80-360): Two dust control plan citations vacated
What's the rule today?
This ALJ decision was superseded by the Commission's decision in the same case. Ezel starts from the controlling decision and answers your situation under current law, with citations.
Plain-English summary
MSHA sought a penalty against Quarto Mining for two alleged violations of a dust control plan provision at its Powhatan No. 4 Mine. Assistant Chief Judge Paul Merlin found that an earlier decision had held the same plan provision invalid. He treated that ruling as controlling, vacated both citations, and dismissed the penalty petition. The Commission later ended its directed review of this docket without ruling on the dust plan issue.
Decision snapshot
- Cited standard: 30 C.F.R. § 75.316.
- Outcome: Citations 779679 and 825966 vacated and penalty petition dismissed; no penalty assessed.
- Key point: An earlier ruling that the same dust plan provision was invalid disposed of both citations.
Full text (FMSHRC public release)
CCASE:
SOL (MSHA) V. QUARTO MINING
DDATE:
19810105
TTEXT:
~68
Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission Office of Administrative Law Judges
SECRETARY OF LABOR,
Civil Penalty Proceeding
MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH
ADMINISTRATION (MSHA),
Docket No. LAKE 80-360
PETITIONER
A/O No. 33-01157-03167
v.
Powhatan No. 4 Mine
QUARTO MINING COMPANY,
RESPONDENT
DECISION
This case consists of a petition for the assessment of civil penalties for two alleged violations of the Act. The operator has filed a motion to dismiss the proceeding and the Solicitor has filed a memorandum in opposition to the respondent's motion. For the reasons which follow respondent's motion is hereby GRANTED.
Citations 779679 and 825966 were issued for alleged violations of 30 CFR 75.316. On September 8, 1980 a hearing was held in Secretary of Labor v. Nacco Mining Company, Quarto Mining Company and The North American Coal Corporation, LAKE 80-251, et al. in which the same provision of respondent's dust control plan at issue in these citations was litigated. In those cases a decision dated September 22, 1980 held invalid this provision of the dust control plan. The decision in LAKE 80-251 is dispositive of these citations.
ORDER
Citations 779679 and 825966 are hereby VACATED and the petition to assess civil penalties is hereby DISMISSED.
Paul Merlin
Assistant Chief Administrative Law Judge
What controls your case today?
The Commission reviewed this case, and its decision is the one that controls. Ezel starts there and answers your situation under current law, 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