Secretary of Labor (MSHA) on behalf of James M. Clarke v. T.P. Mining, Inc. (ALJ decision, May 10, 1984)

Secretary of Labor (MSHA) on behalf of James M. Clarke v. T.P. Mining, Inc. (FMSHRC LAKE 83-97-D): Settlement affirmed and penalty proposal dismissed

Decision type
ALJ decision
Docket
LAKE 83-97-D
Decided
May 10, 1984
Presiding judge
Outcome
Procedural
Precedential status
Checked against source
2026-10-20

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This ALJ decision was superseded by the Commission's decision in the same case.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.

Currency note: this decision dates from 1984
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.
ALJ decision, later reviewed by the Commission
This decision was issued by an FMSHRC Administrative Law Judge, but it was not the final word in the case: the Commission directed review, and the Commission's decision is the one citable as precedent.
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

After the Secretary and T.P. Mining settled James Clarke's discrimination complaint, Judge Joseph B. Kennedy had separated a proposed civil penalty from the complaint. He affirmed the earlier settlement approval and dismissed the complaint. He also dismissed the severed penalty proposal “for want of prosecution,” saying the Solicitor had not supplied an amended complaint as ordered. On review, the Commission struck that phrase from this order while leaving the dismissal in place. This order concerned case disposition, not a mine safety citation.

Decision snapshot

  • Cited standard(s): No mine safety standard is cited in this procedural order.
  • Outcome: Settlement approval affirmed; complaint and severed penalty proposal dismissed. The Commission later removed the stated dismissal ground.
  • Key point: The Commission later removed the judge's adverse characterization of the Secretary's handling of the penalty issue without restoring the dismissed proposal.

Full text (FMSHRC public release)

CCASE:
SOL (MSHA) V. T.P.MINING
DDATE:
19840510
TTEXT:
~1264

Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission Office of Administrative Law Judges

SECRETARY OF LABOR,
DISCRIMINATION PROCEEDING
MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH
ADMINISTRATION (MSHA),
Docket No. LAKE 83-97-D
ON BEHALF OF
JAMES M. CLARKE,
MSHA Case No. VINC-CD-83-09
COMPLAINANT
v. T.P. Strip

T.P. MINING, INC.,
RESPONDENT

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

Before: Judge Kennedy

The Solicitor having failed and refused to comply with my order to provide an amended complaint in support of the penalty proposal that was severed from the discrimination complaint, it is ORDERED that (1) the order approving settlement of the discrimination complaint is AFFIRMED and the complaint DISMISSED and (2) that the severed penalty proposal be, and hereby is, DISMISSED FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION.

Joseph B. Kennedy
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