Mathies Coal Company (ALJ decision, July 17, 1987)
Mathies Coal Company (FMSHRC PENN 87-111): Battery-charger settlement approved at $50
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.
Plain-English summary
Mathies Coal Company faced a proposed $126 penalty for inadequate ventilation of a battery charger. The charger was out of service and not energized, and it was located in a fireproof enclosure with a fire extinguisher and electrical protection. Judge James A. Broderick approved the parties' settlement and ordered payment of $50 within 30 days.
Decision snapshot
- Cited standard(s): The decision describes the battery-charger violation but does not identify the standard number.
- Outcome: The settlement was approved, reducing the proposed penalty from $126 to $50.
- Key point: Mitigating facts about equipment condition and safeguards supported the reduced settlement.
Full text (FMSHRC public release)
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 87-111
PETITIONER A.C. No. 36-00963-03633
v. Mathies Mine
MATHIES COAL COMPANY,
RESPONDENT
DECISION APPROVING SETTLEMENT
Before: Judge Broderick
On July 10, 1987, the Secretary of Labor filed a motion for approval of a settlement reached by the parties in this case. The violations were originally assessed at $126 and the parties proposed to settle for $50.
The motion states that there were several mitigating factors justifying a reduction in the penalty. The violation charged was failure to adequately ventilate a battery charger. The charger was not in service and was not energized. It was located in a steel fireproof enclosure and equipped with a fire extinguisher. The charge and its cable were protected with short circuit and overload protection.
I have considered the motion in the light of the criteria in section 110(i) of the Act and conclude that it should be approved.
Accordingly, the settlement is APPROVED and Respondent is ORDERED TO PAY the sum of $50 within 30 days of the date of this decision.
James A. Broderick
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