Secretary of Labor v. Wayne Ray, employed by Oak Grove Resources (Commission decision, September 22, 2009)

Secretary of Labor v. Wayne Ray (FMSHRC SE 2009-171): Individual penalty reopening request moot after failed delivery

Decision type
Commission decision
Docket
SE 2009-171
Decided
September 22, 2009
Outcome
Procedural
Precedential status
Citable Commission precedent
Checked against source
2026-08-08

Apply this precedent to your situation

This is citable Commission precedent from 2009, and it may have been appealed since. Ezel checks how it stands today and answers your situation, with citations.

Currency note: this decision dates from 2009
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.
Decision of the Commission
This is a decision of the Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission, the highest level of agency review, citable as Commission precedent. It may have been appealed to a U.S. Court of Appeals after issuance under 30 U.S.C. § 816; check subsequent history before relying on it. 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

MSHA assessed an individual penalty against Wayne Ray, but the delivery was refused because the package listed Ray at his law firm's street address without identifying the firm or his attorney. Ray learned of the assessment only when counsel received a delinquency notice. Because he never properly received the assessment, it had not become a final Commission order. The Commission declared reopening moot and gave Ray 30 days from the order to pay or contest the penalty.

Decision snapshot

  • Governing provisions: 29 C.F.R. §§ 2700.26 and 2700.27; 30 U.S.C. §§ 815(a) and 820(c)
  • Outcome: The reopening request was declared moot, and Wayne Ray received a new 30-day period to respond.
  • Key point: An individual assessment does not become final when defective addressing prevents proper delivery to the person charged.

Full text (FMSHRC public release)

Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission

FEDERAL MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH REVIEW COMMISSION

601 NEW JERSEY AVENUE, NW

SUITE 9500

WASHINGTON, DC 20001

September 22, 2009

SECRETARY OF LABOR,

MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH

ADMINISTRATION (MSHA)

v.

WAYNE RAY, employed by OAK GROVE RESOURCES

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

Docket No. SE 2009-171

A.C. No. 01-00851-161298 A

BEFORE: Jordan, Chairman; Duffy, Young, and Cohen, Commissioners

ORDER

BY THE COMMISSION:

This matter arises under the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977, 30 U.S.C.
§ 801 et seq. (2006) (“Mine Act”). On December 12, 2008, the Commission received from Wayne Ray a motion by counsel in which Mr. Ray seeks to reopen a penalty assessment under section 110(c) of the Mine Act, 30 U.S.C. § 820(c), that had allegedly become a final order of the Commission pursuant to section 105(a) of the Mine Act, 30 U.S.C. § 815(a).

Under the Commission’s Procedural Rules, an individual charged under section 110(c) has 30 days following receipt of the proposed penalty assessment within which to notify the Secretary of Labor that he or she wishes to contest the penalty. 29 C.F.R. § 2700.26. If the individual fails to notify the Secretary, the proposed penalty assessment is deemed a final order of the Commission. 29 C.F.R. § 2700.27.

On August 27, 2008, the Department of Labor’s Mine Safety and Health Administration (“MSHA”) issued Proposed Assessment No. 00161298A. Mr. Ray states that he did not learn of the proposed assessment until his counsel received a delinquency notice dated November 28, 2008, indicating that the assessment had become a final order of the Commission. The Secretary confirms that the proposed assessment was never received by Mr. Ray and was returned to MSHA because delivery was refused by the law firm representing him. The Secretary submits that the assessment was addressed solely to Mr. Ray at the street address of the law firm and that delivery was refused “because the address did not indicate that the assessment was meant to be delivered to the law firm or to Mr. Ray’s attorney.”

Having reviewed Mr. Ray’s request and the Secretary’s response, we find the request to reopen to be moot because Mr. Ray never properly received the assessment and the proposed assessment has not become a final order of the Commission.

Since Mr. Ray is now aware of the
proposed penalty assessment, he has 30 days from the date of this order to either contest or pay the proposed penalty. If the proposed penalty is timely contested by Mr. Ray, this case shall proceed pursuant to the Mine Act and the Commission’s Procedural Rules, 29 C.F.R. Part 2700.


Mary Lu Jordan, Chairman


Michael F. Duffy, Commissioner


Michael G. Young, Commissioner


Robert F. Cohen, Jr., Commissioner

Distribution:

F. Thomas Rubenstein, Esq.

Dinsmore & Shohl, LLP

215 Don Knotts Blvd., Suite 310

Morgantown, WV 26501

W. Christian Schumann, Esq.

Office of the Solicitor

U.S. Department of Labor

1100 Wilson Blvd., Room 2220

Arlington, VA 22209-2296

Myra James, Chief

Office of Civil Penalty Compliance, MSHA

U.S. Dept. Of Labor

1100 Wilson Blvd., 25th Floor

Arlington, VA 22209-3939

Chief Administrative Law Judge Robert J. Lesnick

Federal Mine Safety & Health Review Commission

601 New Jersey Avenue, N.W., Suite 9500

Washington, D.C. 20001-2021

Does this precedent still control your case?

Ezel checks whether it still stands, including any court review since, and applies it to your situation 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