Ezel / Agency Decisions / PENN 88-293-D

Consolidation Coal Company (ALJ decision, December 23, 1988)

Consolidation Coal Company (FMSHRC PENN 88-293-D and PENN 88-294-D): Discrimination complaints dismissed

Decision type
ALJ decision
Dockets
PENN 88-293-D, PENN 88-294-D
Decided
December 23, 1988
Presiding judge
Paul Merlin
Outcome
Procedural
Precedential status
Final order, not precedent
Checked against source
2026-08-17
Cited standards
30 U.S.C. § 815(c)
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, 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 binding on the Commission in other cases. 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

Randy G. Cunningham filed two Mine Act discrimination complaints against Consolidation Coal Company. The Commission issued show-cause orders seeking information about the complaints and gave Cunningham an opportunity to explain the failure to respond. The records showed that he received the orders but did not respond. Chief Administrative Law Judge Paul Merlin dismissed both cases.

Decision snapshot

  • Governing provision: 30 U.S.C. § 815(c)
  • Outcome: Both discrimination proceedings were dismissed for failure to respond to the show-cause orders.
  • Key point: A complainant's failure to answer a properly received show-cause order led to dismissal of both proceedings.

Full text (FMSHRC public release)

CCASE:
R.G. CUNNINGHAM V. CONSOLIDATION COAL CO. DDATE: 19881223 TTEXT:

Page 2

~1748
Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission (F.M.S.H.R.C.) Office of Administrative Law Judges

RANDY G. CUNNINGHAM,
DISCRIMINATION PROCEEDINGS
COMPLAINANT
Docket No. PENN 88-293-D
v. PITT CD 88-23

CONSOLIDATION COAL COMPANY,
Docket No. PENN 88-294-D
RESPONDENT
PITT CD 88-24

Dilworth Mine

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

Before: Judge Merlin

On August 17, 1988, you filed with this Commission complaints of discrimination under section 105(c) of the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977. On November 4, 1988, show cause orders were issued directing you to provide information regarding your complaints or show good reason for your failure to do so. These show causes were mailed to you certified mail, return receipt requested and the file contains the receipt cards indicating you received the show cause orders. You have however, not responded and complied with the show cause orders.

Accordingly, these cases are DISMISSED.

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