Secretary of Labor (MSHA) v. U.S. Steel Mining Co., Inc. (ALJ decision, May 4, 1984)

Plain-English summary

MSHA sought a $650 penalty against U.S. Steel Mining for an alleged violation of the mine electrical wiring standard, 30 C.F.R. § 75.514, at its Maple Creek No. 2 Mine. The violation appeared in a section 104(d)(1) order. When the case was called for hearing, U.S. Steel withdrew its contest and agreed to pay the full proposed penalty. Judge George A. Koutras treated the agreement as a settlement motion, found it in the public interest, and approved it. He ordered payment of $650 within 30 days and dismissal of the case upon MSHA's receipt of payment.

Decision snapshot

• Cited standard: 30 C.F.R. § 75.514.
• Outcome: Settlement approved; $650 penalty ordered for Order No. 2102664.
• Key point: Withdrawal of the contest and payment of the full proposed penalty resolved this civil penalty case.

Full text (FMSHRC public release)

CCASE:
SOL (MSHA) V. U.S.STEEL
DDATE:
19840504
TTEXT:
~1166

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. PENN 83-131
PETITIONER
A.C. No. 36-03425-03521
v.
Maple Creek No. 2 Mine
U.S. STEEL MINING CO., INC.,
RESPONDENT

DECISION

Appearances: Janine C. Gismondi, Esq., Office of the Solicitor, U.S. Department of Labor, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, for Petitioner;
Louise Q. Symons, Esq., U.S. Steel Mining Co., Inc., Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, for Respondent.

Before: Judge Koutras

Statement of the Case

This case concerns a civil penalty proposal 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 a civil penalty assessment in the amount of $650 for one violation of mandatory safety standard 30 CFR 75.514. The violation was cited in a section 104(d)(1) order issued on December 9, 1982.

The respondent contested the proposed assessment, and the case was docketed for hearing in Uniontown, Pennsylvania, on March 27, 1984, with five other cases involving these same parties. However, when this docket was called for trial, the parties advised me that the respondent decided to withdraw its contest and request for a hearing, and agreed to pay the full amount of the $650 civil penalty assessment.

Discussion

In view of the foregoing, and in light of the agreement by the parties to dispose of this matter by the respondent's request to withdraw its contest and to pay the full penalty assessment, I considered the request as a motion to approve a proposed settlement pursuant to Commission Rule 29 CFR 2700.30.
~1167
After due consideration of the arguments presented by the parties on the record in support of their joint dispositive settlement of this case, and after review of all of the pleadings filed, including the conditions and practices cited by the inspector in the order which he issued, I granted the motion and concluded that the proposed settlement was in the public interest, and it was approved from the bench (Tr. 6Ô8).

Order

Respondent is ordered to pay a civil penalty in the amount of $650 in full satisfaction of 104(d)(1) Order No. 2102664, and payment is to be made within thirty (30) days of the date of this decision and order. Upon receipt of payment by MSHA, this case is dismissed.

George A. Koutras
Administrative Law Judge