Secretary of Labor v. Jim Walter Resources, Inc. (Commission decision, October 30, 1995)
Secretary of Labor v. Jim Walter Resources, Inc. (FMSHRC SE 94-448, SE 94-586): Reconsideration denied
Apply this to your situation
This order from 1995 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.
Plain-English summary
Jim Walter Resources asked the Commission to reconsider its earlier denial of the company's petition for discretionary review in two civil penalty proceedings. Two commissioners voted to deny reconsideration, while two would have granted it. Because reversing the prior action required a majority of participating commissioners, the motion was denied.
Decision snapshot
- Cited standard(s): The order does not identify a safety standard.
- Outcome: The motion for reconsideration was denied.
- Key point: A tied vote did not provide the majority needed to reverse the Commission's prior action.
Full text (FMSHRC public release)
FED ERA L M INE SA FETY A ND HEA LTH REV IEW COM M ISSION 1730 K STREET NW , 6TH FLOOR
W A SHINGTON, D .C. 2 0 0 0 6
October 30, 1995
SECRETARY OF LABOR,
:
MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH
:
ADMINISTRATION (MSHA)
:
:
v. :
: Docket Nos. SE 94-448
JIM WALTER RESOURCES, INC. : SE 94-586
:
BEFORE: Jordan, Chairman; Doyle, Holen, and Marks, Commissioners
ORDER
BY THE COMMISSION:
Jim Walter Resources, Inc. (AJWR@) has filed a Motion for Reconsideration of the Commission=s October 2, 1995, denial of JWR=s previously filed Petition for Discretionary Review in the above-captioned matter. Upon review of the Motion for Reconsideration, Chairman Jordan and Commissioner Marks vote to deny the motion; Commissioner Doyle and Commissioner Holen would grant the motion and issue a direction for review granting the underlying Petition for Discretionary Review. To reverse the prior action of the Commission and grant the relief requested requires the affirmative vote of a majority of participating Commissioners. Accordingly, the Motion for Reconsideration is denied.
_______
M a ry Lu Jorda n, Cha irm a n
_______
Joyce A . Doyle, Com m issioner
_______
A rlene Holen, Com m issioner
________
Marc Lincoln Marks, Commissioner
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