Greenwich Collieries v. Secretary of Labor (ALJ decision, May 23, 1985)
Greenwich Collieries v. Secretary of Labor (FMSHRC PENN 85-115-R): Citation contest withdrawn after payment
Apply this to your situation
This order from 1985 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.
Plain-English summary
Greenwich Collieries contested an MSHA citation at its Greenwich No. 1 Mine. After paying the proposed civil penalty, the company moved to withdraw its contest because it no longer wished to pursue the issues. Judge Richard C. Steffey granted the motion and separated this docket from a related contest that had been consolidated for prehearing purposes. He dismissed further proceedings in this docket without deciding the citation's merits. The order does not identify the safety standard or penalty amount.
Decision snapshot
- Cited standard: Not identified in this withdrawal order.
- Outcome: Contest of Citation No. 2255647 withdrawn and this docket dismissed after penalty payment.
- Key point: Payment ended the operator's interest in its contest, which was severed from a related docket before dismissal.
Full text (FMSHRC public release)
CCASE:
GREENWICH COLLIERIES v. SOL (MSHA)
DDATE:
19850523
TTEXT:
~760
Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission Office of Administrative Law Judges
GREENWICH COLLIERIES,
CONTEST PROCEEDING
DIVISION OF PENNSYLVANIA
MINES CORPORATION,
Docket No. PENN 85-115-R
CONTESTANT
Citation No. 2255647; 1/17/85
v. Greenwich No. 1 Mine
SECRETARY OF LABOR,
MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH
ADMINISTRATION (MSHA),
RESPONDENT
ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO WITHDRAW
Before: Judge Steffey
Counsel for contestant filed on May 1, 1985, a motion to withdraw the notice of contest filed in the above-entitled proceeding. The reason given in support of granting the motion is that contestant has paid the civil penalty proposed by MSHA with respect to the violation alleged in Citation No. 2255647. In such circumstances, contestant states that it now has no interest in pursuing the matters raised in the notice of contest. I find that the motion should be granted for the reason given by contestant and for the reason given by the Commission in its decision in Old Ben Coal Co., 7 FMSHRC 205 (1985).
In a prehearing order issued March 14, 1985, the issues raised in the notice of contest filed in Docket No. PENN 85-115-R were consolidated with the issues raised by the notice of contest filed in Docket No. PENN 85-114-R. The instant case should be severed from the consolidated proceeding in Docket No. PENN 85-114-R so that it will be clear that it is no longer the subject of the prehearing order issued in both dockets.
WHEREFORE, it is ordered:
(A) The issues raised by the notice of contest filed in Docket No. PENN 85-115-R are severed from the issues raised by the notice of contest filed in Docket No. PENN 85-114-R for purposes of separate disposition as hereinafter ordered.
~761
(B) The motion to withdraw filed May 1, 1985, is granted, the notice of contest filed in Docket No. PENN 85-115-R is deemed to have been withdrawn, and all further proceedings herein are dismissed.
Richard C. Steffey
Administrative Law Judge
What applies to your situation today?
This order bound one employer. Ezel checks the current MSHA standards and Commission precedent against your facts, 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