Secretary of Labor v. Hoover, Inc. (Commission decision, October 30, 2009)

Plain-English summary

Hoover said it never received an assessment covering six citations, despite delivery records naming an employee who was on long-term medical leave. The company investigated but could not find the package or identify who signed for it. It had previously told MSHA that it intended to contest all six penalties. The Secretary did not oppose reopening and supplied a signature page that did not match the carrier's delivery record. The Commission reopened the assessment in the interests of justice and remanded for proceedings on the merits.

Decision snapshot

• Governing provisions: 29 C.F.R. §§ 2700.1(b) and 2700.28; 30 U.S.C. § 815(a)
• Outcome: The assessment was reopened and remanded to the Chief Administrative Law Judge.
• Key point: Conflicting delivery records, prompt investigation, and prior notice of an intent to contest can support reopening when an assessment cannot be traced internally.

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

October 30, 2009

SECRETARY OF LABOR,

MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH

ADMINISTRATION (MSHA)

v.

HOOVER, INC.

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

Docket No. SE 2009-600-M

A.C. No. 40-03012-171882

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 June 11, 2009, the Commission received from Hoover, Inc., (“Hoover”) a motion by counsel to reopen a penalty assessment that had become a final order of the Commission pursuant to section 105(a) of the Mine Act, 30 U.S.C. § 815(a).

Under section 105(a) of the Mine Act, an operator who wishes to contest a proposed penalty must notify the Secretary of Labor no later than 30 days after receiving the proposed penalty assessment. If the operator fails to notify the Secretary, the proposed penalty assessment is deemed a final order of the Commission. 30 U.S.C. § 815(a).

We have held that in appropriate circumstances, we possess jurisdiction to reopen uncontested assessments that have become final Commission orders under section 105(a). Jim Walter Res., Inc., 15 FMSHRC 782, 786-89 (May 1993) (“JWR”). In evaluating requests to reopen final section 105(a) orders, the Commission has found guidance in Rule 60(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure under which, for example, a party could be entitled to relief from a final order of the Commission on the basis of mistake, inadvertence, or excusable neglect. See 29 C.F.R. § 2700.1(b) (“the Commission and its Judges shall be guided so far as practicable by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure”); JWR, 15 FMSHRC at 787. We have also observed that default is a harsh remedy and that, if the defaulting party can make a showing of good cause for a failure to timely respond, the case may be reopened and appropriate proceedings on the merits permitted. See Coal Prep. Servs., Inc., 17 FMSHRC 1529, 1530 (Sept. 1995).

On December 21, 2008, the Department of Labor’s Mine Safety and Health Administration (“MSHA”) issued Proposed Assessment No. 000171882 to Hoover, proposing penalties for six citations that had been issued to Hoover in October and November 2008. After receiving no response, MSHA sent Hoover a delinquency notice on or around March 19, 2009. Hoover promptly notified MSHA that it had no record of receiving the assessment and that the individual MSHA identified from the Federal Express records as having signed for the delivery, Jerry Rogers, had been on long-term medical leave since early December 2008. Hoover explains in its motion, which is supported by an affidavit, that it investigated the matter but never located the FedEx package or determined who signed for the delivery. Hoover had previously indicated to MSHA its intent to contest all six of the proposed penalties.

The Secretary does not oppose Hoover’s request to reopen the assessment, and includes with her response a signature page for the delivery which does not match the Federal Express record stating that the delivery was signed for by Rogers.

Having reviewed Hoover’s request and the Secretary’s response, in the interests of justice, we hereby reopen this matter and remand it to the Chief Administrative Law Judge for further proceedings pursuant to the Mine Act and the Commission’s Procedural Rules, 29 C.F.R. Part 2700. Accordingly, consistent with Rule 28, the Secretary shall file a petition for assessment of penalty within 45 days of the date of this order. See 29 C.F.R. § 2700.28.

Mary Lu Jordan, Chairman

Michael F. Duffy, Commissioner

Michael G. Young, Commissioner

Robert F. Cohen, Jr., Commissioner

Distribution:

G. Summer, R. Bouldin, Jr., Esq.

Bouldin & Bouldin, PLC

122 North Church St.

P.O. Box 811

Murfreesboro, TN 77133

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