Secretary of Labor v. Matt Rudnianyn and Jeff D. Farley, employed by Commercial Industrial Corp. (Commission decision, February 14, 2013)

Plain-English summary

MSHA assessed Matt Rudnianyn and Jeff Farley personally under section 110(c), but neither assessment was timely contested. Rudnianyn said Commercial Industrial and its agents did not know about the assessments until delinquency notices arrived and suggested that any received papers may have been mistaken for documents in a related operator settlement. The Secretary did not oppose reopening, although the assessment and delinquency mailings had been sent to the operator's address of record. The Commission reopened both final assessments in the interests of justice and remanded them for penalty proceedings.

Decision snapshot

• Governing provisions: 30 U.S.C. § 820(c); 29 C.F.R. §§ 2700.26 through 2700.28
• Outcome: Both final individual penalty assessments were reopened and remanded to the Chief Administrative Law Judge.
• Key point: Possible confusion between individual assessments and a related operator settlement supported unopposed reopening of both matters.

Full text (FMSHRC public release)

FEDERAL MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH REVIEW COMMISSION

1331 PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE, NW, SUITE 520N

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20004-1710

February 14, 2013

SECRETARY OF LABOR,

MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH

ADMINISTRATION (MSHA)

v.

MATT RUDNIANYN and JEFF D. FARLEY,

employed by COMMERCIAL INDUSTRIAL

CORP.

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

Docket No. SE 2012-531-M
A.C. No. 08-01231-280533 A

Docket No. SE 2012-532-M
A.C. No. 08-01231-280994 A

BEFORE: Jordan, Chairman; Young and Nakamura, Commissioners

ORDER

BY THE COMMISSION:

These matters arise under the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977, 30 U.S.C.
§ 801 et seq. (2006) (“Mine Act”). On June 13, 2012, the Commission received a motion seeking to reopen two penalty assessments against Matt Rudnianyn and Jeff D. Farley under section 110(c) of the Mine Act, 30 U.S.C. § 820(c), that had become final orders of the Commission. The motion was filed by Mr. Rudnianyn, President of Commercial Industrial Corp. (“Commercial”), on behalf of himself and Mr. Farley.

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.

We have held, however, that in appropriate circumstances, we possess jurisdiction to reopen uncontested assessments that have become final Commission orders. 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).

Mr. Rudnianyn asserts that Commercial and its agents were unaware of these assessments until they received delinquency notices from MSHA on May 14 and 21, 2012. He suggests that if the assessments had been received, they may have erroneously been considered to be part of its settlement negotiations of a related case against the operator during February 2012. The Secretary does not oppose the requests to reopen. We note that these section 110(c) proposed assessments and notices of delinquency were mailed to the operator’s address of record.

Having reviewed these requests and the Secretary’s responses, in the interests of justice, we hereby reopen these matters and remand them 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.

/s/ Mary Lu Jordan

Mary Lu Jordan, Commissioner

/s/ Michael G. Young

Michael G. Young, Commissioner

/s/ Patrick K. Nakamura

Patrick K. Nakamura, Commissioner

Distribution:

Matt Rudniany, President

Commercial Industrial Corp.

11810 NW 115TH Ave.,

Reddick, FL 32686

W. Christian Schumann, Esq.

Office of the Solicitor

U.S. Department of Labor

1100 Wilson Blvd., Room 2220

Arlington, VA 22209-2296

Melanie Garris

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

1331 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W., Suite 520N

Washington, D.C. 20004-1710