Ezel / Agency Decisions / VA 92-108-D

Clinchfield Coal Company (ALJ decision, August 3, 1992)

Clinchfield Coal Company (FMSHRC VA 92-108-D): Discrimination proceeding dismissed after settlement

Decision type
ALJ decision
Docket
VA 92-108-D
Decided
August 3, 1992
Presiding judge
William Fauver
Outcome
Settled
Precedential status
Final order, not precedent
Checked against source
2026-08-15
Official source
Read the official release (fmshrc.gov)
PDF
View Official PDF

Apply this to your situation

This order from 1992 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 1992
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 Commission precedent. 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

Gary Honaker asked to dismiss his discrimination proceeding against Clinchfield Coal Company based on a settlement. Judge William Fauver granted the request and dismissed the proceeding. The short order does not state the settlement terms or address the merits of the discrimination allegations.

Decision snapshot

  • Cited standard(s): None stated in the order.
  • Outcome: The discrimination proceeding was dismissed at the complainant’s request based on a settlement.
  • Key point: The order records the settlement-based dismissal but does not disclose the agreement’s terms.

Full text (FMSHRC public release)

Page 2

~1570

Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission Office of Administrative Law Judges

GARY HONAKER,
DISCRIMINATION PROCEEDING
COMPLAINANT
Docket No. VA 92-108-D v.
NORT CD 92-03
CLINCHFIELD COAL COMPANY,
RESPONDENT

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

Upon the request of Complainant, based upon a settlement, this proceeding is DISMISSED.

William Fauver
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.

Try Ezel Pro free for 7 days. Cancel anytime before the trial ends and you pay nothing.

  • 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