Ezel / Agency Decisions / LAKE 86-58-R

White County Coal Corporation (ALJ decision, June 30, 1986)

White County Coal Corporation (FMSHRC LAKE 86-58-R): Two citations affirmed and contests dismissed

Decision type
ALJ decision
Dockets
LAKE 86-58-R, LAKE 86-59-R
Decided
June 30, 1986
Presiding judge
Gary Melick
Outcome
Citations affirmed
Precedential status
Reviewed by the Commission
Checked against source
2026-10-20
Cited standards
30 U.S.C. § 814(a)
Official source
Read the official release (fmshrc.gov)
PDF
View Official PDF

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This ALJ decision was superseded by the Commission's decision in the same case.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 1986
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

White County Coal Corporation contested two withdrawal orders issued at its Pattiki Mine. In an earlier ruling, Judge Gary Melick had modified those orders to section 104(a) citations. White County then said it did not dispute the violations or their significant and substantial findings. The judge affirmed both modified citations and dismissed the contests as moot.

Decision snapshot

  • Cited provision: Mine Act section 104(a), governing citations.
  • Outcome: Both modified citations affirmed with significant and substantial findings; contests dismissed as moot.
  • Key point: White County no longer contested the violations or the significant and substantial findings after the orders were modified.

Full text (FMSHRC public release)

CCASE:
WHITE COUNTY COAL V. SOL (MSHA)
DDATE:
19860630
TTEXT:
~994

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

WHITE COUNTY COAL CORPORATION, CONTEST PROCEEDINGS CONTESTANT
Docket No. LAKE 86-58-R
v. Order No. 2817373; 2/6/86

SECRETARY OF LABOR,
Docket No. LAKE 86-59-R
MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH
Order No. 2817375; 2/21/86
ADMINISTRATION (MSHA),
RESPONDENT
Pattiki Mine

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

By interlocutory decision dated June 9, 1986, (Appendix A) the Motions for Summary Decision filed by the Contestant were granted in the captioned cases and the withdrawal orders therein were accordingly modified to citations under section 104(a) of the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977, 30 U.S.C. 814(a). By letter dated June 24, 1986, Contestant states that it does not dispute either the existence of the violations alleged in these citations or the "significant and substantial" findings associated therewith. Accordingly section 104(a) Citation Nos. 2817373 and 2817375 are affirmed with "significant and substantial" findings. These Contest Proceedings have accordingly been rendered moot and are therefore dismissed.

Gary Melick
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