Ezel / Agency Decisions / penn-86-203-alj
FMSHRC ALJ decision Docket PENN 86-203 Decided November 24, 1986 Citations vacated Judge Avram Weisberger

United States Steel Mining Company

United States Steel Mining Company (FMSHRC PENN 86-203): Battery-lid citations vacated and case dismissed

Apply this to your situation

This order from 1986 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 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.
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

MSHA alleged that United States Steel Mining Company failed to secure battery lids on batteries mounted on a scoop. The Secretary moved to withdraw the civil penalty because prior proceedings involving the same parties had already decided the issue against the Secretary. Judge Avram Weisberger found the prior decisions res judicata, granted the motion, vacated Citations 2683479 and 2683654, and dismissed the case.

Decision snapshot

  • Cited standards: None stated in the order.
  • Outcome: Citations 2683479 and 2683654 were vacated, and the civil penalty proceeding was dismissed.
  • Key point: Prior decisions involving the same parties can bar relitigation of the same citation issue.

Full text (FMSHRC public release)

CCASE:
SOL (MSHA) V. U.S. STEEL MINING
DDATE:
19861124
TTEXT:

Page 2

~1839

       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 86-203
PETITIONER A.C. No. 36-05018-03613

      v.                              Cumberland Mine

UNITED STATES STEEL MINING
COMPANY,
RESPONDENT

                         ORDER OF DISMISSAL

Before: Judge Weisberger

 Petitioner's Motion to Withdraw civil penalty was filed with

the Commission on November 3, 1986. To date respondent has not
responded to this motion.

 Petitioner in its motion, has alleged, in essence, that the

circumstances of the two citations in this case are
indistinguishable from prior adverse decisions to peritioner. The
citations in this case, cite, in essence, allegations that
battery lids were not secured on batteries on a scoop.

 It appears that the issue here was decided adverse to

petitioner in prior proceedings involving the same parties,
Secretary v. U.S. Steel, 6 FMSHRC 1617 (1984) (ALJ); Secretary v.
U.S. Steel, 6 FMSHRC 1510 (1984) (ALJ); Secretary v. U.S. Steel 6
FMSHRC 155 (1984) (ALJ).

 Accordingly, as the above decisions are Res Judicata (See

Secretary v. U.S. Steel 5 FMSHRC 1334 (1983)), the Motion to
Withdraw Civil Penalty is GRANTED. Citations Numbers 2683479 and
2683654 are VACATED, and this case is DISMISSED.

                         Avram Weisberger
                         Administrative Law Judge
                         (703) 756\u00c46210

Get today's answer for your situation

You just read what one judge decided for one employer in 1986, 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.