Ezel / Agency Decisions / lake-86-127-m-alj
FMSHRC ALJ decision Docket LAKE 86-127-M, LAKE 86-128-M Decided June 22, 1987 Settled Judge George A. Koutras

Sellersburg Stone Company

Sellersburg Stone Company (FMSHRC LAKE 86-127-M and LAKE 86-128-M): Settlements approved for $1,080

Apply this to your situation

This order from 1987 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 1987
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 ALJ decision, not Commission precedent
This decision became final under the 40-day rule in 30 U.S.C. § 823(d)(1) because no later Commission review appears in the official index. It binds the parties but 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

Sellersburg Stone faced 13 alleged safety violations at its stone mine under standards covering guarding, electrical equipment, and electrical bushings. Judge George A. Koutras reviewed the Secretary's explanation for reducing the proposed penalties and approved settlements totaling $1,080 across two dockets. The operator was ordered to pay the settlement amounts within 30 days, after which the proceedings would be dismissed.

Decision snapshot

  • Cited standards: 30 C.F.R. §§ 56.14001, 56.14003, and 56.11012
  • Outcome: Settlements in LAKE 86-127-M and LAKE 86-128-M were approved for $571 and $509, respectively.
  • Key point: A settlement supported by the statutory penalty criteria and a factual explanation for the reductions may be approved in the public interest.

Full text (FMSHRC public release)

CCASE:
SOL (MSHA) V. SELLERSBURG STONE
DDATE:
19870622
TTEXT:

Page 2

~1109

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

SECRETARY OF LABOR, CIVIL PENALTY PROCEEDINGS
MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH
ADMINISTRATION (MSHA), Docket No. LAKE 86-127-M
PETITIONER A.C. No. 12-00109-05508

           v.                            Docket No. LAKE 86-128-M
                                         A.C. No. 12-00109-05509

SELLERSBURG STONE COMPANY,
RESPONDENT Sellersburg Stone Mine

                   DECISIONS APPROVING SETTLEMENTS

Before: Judge Koutras

                        Statement of the Proceedings

 These proceedings concern proposals for assessment of civil

penalties filed by the petitioner against the respondent pursuant
to section 110(a) of the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of
1977, 30 U.S.C. 820(a), seeking civil penalty assessments for
13 alleged violations of certain mandatory safety standards found
in Part 56, Title 30, Code of Federal Regulations. The petitioner
has now filed a motion pursuant to Commission Rule 30, 29 C.F.R.
2700.30, seeking approval of the proposed settlements. Th
citations, initial assessments, and the proposed settlement
amounts are as follows:

Docket No. LAKE 86Ä127ÄM

                              30 C.F.R.

Citation No. Date Section Assessment Settlement

2633854 06/17/86 56.14001 $ 119.00 65.00
2633855 06/17/86 56.14003 119.00 65.00
2633859 06/17/86 56.14001 192.00 138.00
2633860 06/17/86 56.11012 119.00 119.00
2844942 06/17/86 56.14003 119.00 65.00
2844943 06/17/86 56.11012 119.00 119.00

                                              $ 787.00      $ 571.00

Docket No. LAKE 86Ä128ÄM
30 C.F.R.
Citation No. Date Section Assessment Settlement

2844949 06/17/86 56.14003 $119.00 65.00
2844950 06/17/86 56.14003 119.00 65.00
2844954 06/17/86 56.14003 119.00 65.00
2844955 06/17/86 56.14003 119.00 65.00
2844960 06/17/86 56.14003 119.00 65.00
2844962 06/17/86 56.11012 119.00 119.00

Page 3

2844963 06/17/86 56.14003 119.00 65.00

                            $ 833.00   $ 509.00

Page 4

~1110
Discussion

 In support of the proposed settlement disposition of these

cases, the petitioner has submitted information pertaining to the
six statutory civil penalty criteria found in section 110(i) of
the Act. In addition, the petitioner has submitted a full
discussion and disclosure as to the facts and circumstances
surrounding the issuance of the violations in question, and a
reasonable justification for the reduction of the original
proposed civil penalty assessments.

                           Conclusion

 After careful review and consideration of the pleadings,

arguments, and submissions in support of the motion to approve
the proposed settlement of these cases, I conclude and find that
the proposed settlement dispositions are reasonable and in the
public interest. Accordingly, pursuant to 29 C.F.R. 2700.30,
the motion IS GRANTED, and the settlements ARE APPROVED.

                             ORDER

 Respondent IS ORDERED to pay civil penalties in the

settlement amounts shown above in satisfaction of the citations
in question within thirty (30) days of the date of these
decisions and order, and upon receipt of payment by the
petitioner, these proceedings are dismissed.

                              George A. Koutras
                              Administrative Law Judge

Get today's answer for your situation

You just read what one judge decided for one employer in 1987, 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.