FMSHRC ALJ decision Docket LAKE 91-718, LAKE 91-748, LAKE 91-796, LAKE 91-685, LAKE 91-728, LAKE 91-729, LAKE 91-730, LAKE 91-747 Decided January 15, 1992 Settled Judge Avram Weisberger Transcribed from scan

Old Ben Coal Company

Old Ben Coal Company (FMSHRC LAKE 91-718 and related dockets): Settlement approved and penalties reduced

Apply this to your situation

This order from 1992 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 1992
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 approving a settlement, 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.
Transcribed from a scanned original: FMSHRC released this decision as an image-only file. The full text below is a machine transcription, proofread against the scan. Check the official release before quoting exact language.
Read the official release (fmshrc.gov)

Plain-English summary

Old Ben Coal Company faced consolidated civil penalty proceedings involving its No. 24, No. 25, and No. 26 Mines. Judge Avram Weisberger severed the cases from a larger docket so they could be decided separately, then considered the parties' settlement motion after a hearing on another matter. The settlement reduced the proposed penalties from $3,443 to $1,391. The judge approved the settlement and ordered payment of $1,391 within 30 days.

Decision snapshot

  • Cited provisions: 30 U.S.C. §§ 815(d) and 820(i)
  • Outcome: The settlement was approved, and the total proposed penalties were reduced from $3,443 to $1,391.
  • Key point: The ALJ approved the negotiated reduction after considering the parties' representations and supporting documentation under the Mine Act's penalty criteria.

Full text (FMSHRC public release)

CCASE:
SOL (MSHA) v. OLD BEN COAL
DDATE:
19920115
TTEXT:


Page 2

~150

           Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission
                  Office of Administrative Law Judges
                         2 Skyline, 10th Floor
                          5203 Leesburg Pike
                     Falls Church, Virginia 22041

SECRETARY OF LABOR, CIVIL PENALTY PROCEEDINGS
MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH
ADMINISTRATION (MSHA), Docket No. LAKE 91-721
PETITIONER A.C. No. 11-00589-03791
v.
Docket No. LAKE 91-754
OLD BEN COAL COMPANY, A.C. No. 11-00589-03797
RESPONDENT
Docket No. LAKE 92-3
A.C. No. 11-00589-03798

                                     No. 24 Mine

                                     Docket No. LAKE 91-685
                                     A.C. No. 11-02392-03835

                                     No. 25 Mine

                                     Docket No. LAKE 91-487
                                     A.C. No. 11-00590-03834

                                     Docket No. LAKE 91-686
                                     A.C. No. 11-00590-03837

                                     Docket No. LAKE 91-724
                                     A.C. No. 11-00590-03845

                                     No. 26 Mine

SECRETARY OF LABOR, CIVIL PENALTY PROCEEDINGS
MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH
ADMINISTRATION (MSHA), Docket No. LAKE 91-718
PETITIONER A.C. No. 11-00586-03655
v.
Docket No. LAKE 91-748
ZEIGLER COAL COMPANY, A.C. No. 11-00586-03656
RESPONDENT
Docket No. LAKE 91-796
A.C. No. 11-00586-03658

                                     Murdock Mine

                                     Docket No. LAKE 91-728
                                     A.C. No. 11-02408-03644

Page 3

~151
Docket No. LAKE 91-729
A.C. No. 11-02408-03645

                                       Docket No. LAKE 91-730
                                       A.C. No. 11-02408-03646

                                       Docket No. LAKE 91-747
                                       A.C. No. 11-02408-03647

                                       No. 11 Mine

                       DECISION APPROVING SETTLEMENT

Appearances: Rafael Alvarez, Esq., U.S. Department of Labor,
Office of the Solicitor, Chicago, Illinois,
for Petitioner;
Gregory S. Keltner, Esq., Old Ben Coal Company,
Fairview Heights, Illinois, for Respondent.

Before: Judge Weisberger

 In order to expedite a decision on these cases, it is

ORDERED that they be severed from Docket No. LAKE 91-29 et al.

 These cases are before me upon petitions for assessment of

civil penalty under Section 105(d) of the Federal Mine Safety and
Health Act of 1977 (the Act). On December 16, 1991, subsequent to
a hearing on the merits on another matter, Petitioner moved to
approve settlement agreement and to dismiss the cases. A
reduction in penalties from $3,443 to $1,391 is proposed. I have
considered the representations and documentation submitted in
these cases, and I conclude that the proffered settlement is
appropriate under the criteria set forth in Section 110(i) of the
Act.

 WHEREFORE, the motion for approval of settlement is GRANTED,

and it is ORDERED that Respondent pay penalties of $1,391 within
30 days of this order.

                                   Avram Weisberger
                                   Administrative Law Judge

Get today's answer for your situation

You just read what one judge decided for one employer in 1992, 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.