Ezel / Agency Decisions / PENN 88-203

Rochester and Pittsburgh Coal Co. (ALJ decision, July 1, 1988)

Rochester and Pittsburgh Coal Co. (FMSHRC PENN 88-203): Discrimination proceeding dismissed

Decision type
ALJ decision
Docket
PENN 88-203
Decided
July 1, 1988
Presiding judge
Avram Weisberger
Outcome
Procedural
Precedential status
Final order, not precedent
Checked against source
2026-08-20
Official source
Read the official release (fmshrc.gov)
PDF
View Official PDF

Apply this to your situation

This order from 1988 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 1988
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 under the Mine Act's 40-day rule
This administrative law judge decision became a final decision of the Commission because no Commissioner directed review within 40 days, under 30 U.S.C. § 823(d)(1). It is binding on 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

Dwight Baum asked to withdraw his request for a hearing in a discrimination proceeding against Rochester and Pittsburgh Coal Company. Judge Avram Weisberger granted the motion and dismissed the case. The respondent's motion for summary decision was therefore declared moot.

Decision snapshot

  • Cited standards: None stated in the decision.
  • Outcome: The discrimination proceeding was dismissed after the complainant withdrew his hearing request.
  • Key point: The withdrawal ended the proceeding and made the respondent's summary-decision motion moot.

Full text (FMSHRC public release)

CCASE:
DWIGHT BAUM V. ROCHESTER & PITTSBURGH COAL

DDATE:
19880701

TTEXT:

Page 2

~880
Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission (F.M.S.H.R.C.) Office of Administrative Law Judges

DWIGHT BAUM,
DISCRIMINATION PROCEEDING
COMPLAINANT
v. Docket No. PENN 88-203

ROCHESTER AND PITTSBURGH
PITT CD 87–16
COAL CO.,
RESPONDENT

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

Before: Judge Weisberger

On June 23, 1988, Complainant filed a Motion to Withdraw in which he moved to withdraw his request for hearing in the above captioned matter. Accordingly, this Motion is granted.

It is ordered that the above case be DISMISSED. In consequence of this order, Respondents Motion for Summary Decision is declared MOOT.

Avram Weisberger
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