Ezel / Agency Decisions / PENN 87-102

Helen Mining Company (ALJ decision, June 22, 1987)

Helen Mining Company (FMSHRC PENN 87-102): Roof-bolt settlement reduced to $500

Decision type
ALJ decision
Docket
PENN 87-102
Decided
June 22, 1987
Presiding judge
Paul Merlin
Outcome
Settled
Precedential status
Final order, not precedent
Checked against source
2026-08-21
Cited standards
30 C.F.R. § 75.200
Official source
Read the official release (fmshrc.gov)
PDF
View Official PDF

Apply this to your situation

This order from 1987 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 1987
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

Helen Mining operated the Homer City Mine, where an order cited six missing roof bolts and one loose roof bolt under 30 C.F.R. § 75.200. The Secretary sought to reduce the original $800 assessment because the special-assessment narrative incorrectly said that a foreman had been observed in an unsupported area. Judge Paul Merlin approved the settlement and ordered the operator to pay $500 within 30 days.

Decision snapshot

  • Cited standard: 30 C.F.R. § 75.200
  • Outcome: The settlement was approved and the operator was ordered to pay $500.
  • Key point: A discrepancy between the assessment narrative and the inspector's actual observations supported reducing the penalty.

Full text (FMSHRC public release)

CCASE:
SOL (MSHA) V. HELEN MINING
DDATE:
19870622
TTEXT:

Page 2

~1124

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 87-102
PETITIONER
A.C. No. 36-00926-03658

v. Homer City Mine

HELEN MINING COMPANY,
RESPONDENT

DECISION APPROVING SETTLEMENT
ORDER TO PAY

Before: Judge Merlin

The Solicitor has filed a motion to approve settlement of the violation involved in this cases. The original assessment was $800 and the proposed settlement is for $500.

The subject order was issued for a violation of 30 C.F.R.
75.200 when an MSHA inspector detected six missing roof bolts and one loose roof bolt at the M butt construction overcast in the Muddy Run area. The Solicitor represents that a reduction from the original assessment is warranted because the special assessment narrative erroneously stated that a "foreman was observed in the unsupported area." The inspector, however, did not observe individuals working under unsupported roof, and did not charge such conduct in his order.

In light of this information regarding the discrepancies between the assessment narrative and the factual basis for the order, I approve the recommended settlement.

Accordingly, the motion to approve settlement is GRANTED and the operator is ORDERED TO PAY $500 within 30 days of the date of this decision.

Paul Merlin
Chief 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