Florence Mining Company (ALJ decision, June 9, 1989)

Florence Mining Company (FMSHRC PENN 86-297-R, PENN 87-16): Remand penalty reduced to $100

Decision type
ALJ decision
Dockets
PENN 86-297-R, PENN 87-16
Decided
June 9, 1989
Presiding judge
Outcome
Modified
Precedential status
Final order, not precedent
Checked against source
2026-08-17
Cited standards

Apply this to your situation

This order from 1989 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 1989
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 penalty decision followed an earlier Commission affirmance and remand. It became final under the 40-day rule in 30 U.S.C. § 823(d)(1) because no later review of this ruling 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

The Commission had affirmed Florence Mining Company's violation of 30 C.F.R. § 75.1704, reversed the findings of unwarrantable failure and significant and substantial violation, and remanded the case for reconsideration of the civil penalty. On remand, Judge William Fauver considered the Mine Act penalty criteria and reduced the penalty to $100. Florence Mining Company was ordered to pay the penalty within 30 days.

Decision snapshot

  • Cited standard: 30 C.F.R. § 75.1704
  • Outcome: On remand, the civil penalty was set at $100 after the Commission had affirmed the violation and reversed the unwarrantable-failure and significant-and-substantial findings.
  • Key point: After Commission review changes the findings, the ALJ may reassess the penalty on remand under the statutory criteria.

Full text (FMSHRC public release)

CCASE:
FLORENCE MINING V. SOL (MSHA)
DDATE:
19890609
TTEXT:


Page 2

~1065
Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission (F.M.S.H.R.C.) Office of Administrative Law Judges

FLORENCE MINING COMPANY,
CONTEST PROCEEDING
CONTESTANT
Docket No. PENN 86-297-R
v. Order No. 2697882; 8/14/86

SECRETARY OF LABOR,
Florence No. 2 Mine
MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH
ADMINISTRATION (MSHA),
RESPONDENT

SECRETARY OF LABOR,
CIVIL PENALTY PROCEEDING
MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH
Docket No. PENN 87-16
ADMINISTRATION, (MSHA)
A.C. No. 36-02448-03575
PETITIONER
Florence No. 2 Mine
v.

FLORENCE MINING COMPANY,
RESPONDENT

DECISION ON REMAND

On May 9, 1989, the Commission affirmed my decision finding a violation of 30 C.F.R. 75.1704 and reversed the "unwarrantable failure" and "significant and substantial" findings in the decision, remanding the cases for reconsideration of the civil penalty of $400.

Having considered all of the criteria for a civil penalty in 110(i) of the Act, I find that a penalty of $100 is appropriat for the violation.

ORDER

WHEREFORE IT IS ORDERED that Florence Mining Company shall pay the above civil penalty of $100 within 30 days fo this Decision.

William Fauver
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