Secretary of Labor v. Youghiogheny & Ohio Coal Co. (ALJ decision, August 8, 1985)

Secretary of Labor v. Youghiogheny & Ohio Coal Co. (FMSHRC LAKE 84-98): Two violations and $1,950 penalty confirmed

Decision type
ALJ decision
Docket
LAKE 84-98
Decided
August 8, 1985
Presiding judge
Outcome
Citations affirmed
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This ALJ decision was superseded by the Commission's decision in the same case.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 1985
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 a hearing in the penalty case against Youghiogheny & Ohio Coal Co., Judge Joseph B. Kennedy tentatively found two violations and set penalties of $1,000 and $950. He then ordered the operator to show why that bench ruling should not become final. When the operator did not show cause, this decision confirmed the two violations and ordered payment of $1,950. The written decision did not identify the cited safety standards or explain the findings. The Commission later vacated it because it lacked the findings, conclusions, and reasons required by its procedural rule, and remanded for a new decision.

Decision snapshot

  • Cited standard(s): The written decision does not identify the safety standards underlying the two citations.
  • Outcome: Two violations confirmed; penalties of $1,000 and $950, totaling $1,950, ordered. The Commission later vacated this decision.
  • Key point: The judge adopted a tentative bench ruling after the operator did not show cause; the Commission later required a written decision stating its reasons.

Full text (FMSHRC public release)

CCASE:
SOL (MSHA) v. YOUGHIOGHENY & OHIO COAL
DDATE:
19850808
TTEXT:
~1185
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 84-98
PETITIONER
A.O. No: 33-00968-03568

Nelms No. 2 Mine v.
YOUGHIOGHENY & OHIO COAL CO.,
RESPONDENT

DECISION

Appearances: Patrick M. Zohn, Esq., Office of the Solicitor, U.S. Department of Labor, Cleveland, Ohio, for Petitioner;
Robert C. Kota, Esq., St. Clairsville, Ohio, for Respondent

Before: Judge Kennedy

This matter came on for an evidentiary hearing in Wheeling, West Virginia on May 30 and 31, 1985. At the conclusion of the evidence the trial judge entered a tentative bench decision (Tr. 408-409) finding the two violations charged did, in fact, occur and that the penalties warranted were $1,000 for Citation 2203748 and its companion closure order and $950 for Citation 2327363.

Upon receipt of the transcript, the trial judge issued an order to show cause why the tentative decision should not be confirmed as the final disposition of this matter. The operator having failed to show such cause, it is ORDERED that the tentative decision of May 31, 1985 be, and hereby is, ADOPTED and CONFIRMED as the final disposition of this case. It is FURTHER ORDERED that the operator pay the amount of the penalty found warranted, $1,950, on or before Monday, August 26, 1985.

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