Hocker Construction, LLP (Commission decision, May 16, 2011)

Plain-English summary

Hocker Construction asked to reopen a penalty assessment that became final after it missed the 30-day contest deadline. The company said it believed the assessment did not need to be contested because the underlying citations had been terminated. The Secretary opposed reopening, noting that misunderstanding the term “termination” did not justify the missed deadline and that Hocker waited more than five months after a delinquency notice to seek relief. The Commission found the explanation insufficient and denied reopening without prejudice. Hocker was allowed 30 days to file an amended or renewed request.

Decision snapshot

• Governing provisions: 29 C.F.R. § 2700.1(b); 30 U.S.C. §§ 801 and 815(a)
• Outcome: The reopening request was denied without prejudice, with 30 days allowed for a renewed request.
• Key point: Misunderstanding a citation's termination and leaving a long post-notice delay unexplained do not establish grounds to reopen a final assessment.

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

May 16, 2011

SECRETARY OF LABOR,

MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH

ADMINISTRATION (MSHA)

v.

HOCKER CONSTRUCTION, LLP

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

Docket No. WEST 2011-239-M

A.C. No. 05-04877-210165

BEFORE: Jordan, Chairman; Duffy, Young, Cohen, and Nakamura, 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 November 17, 2010, the Commission received a request to reopen a penalty assessment issued to Hocker Construction, LLP (“Hocker”) that became 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, however, 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 February 3, 2010, the Department of Labor’s Mine Safety and Health Administration (“MSHA”) issued Proposed Assessment No. 000210165 to Hocker. The operator states that it did not send a contest of the proposed penalty assessment on time because it thought that the underlying citations had been terminated.

The Secretary opposes Hocker’s request to reopen the proposed assessment. She submits that ignorance of the rules and the law is insufficient to justify reopening a case and that Hocker’s misunderstanding of the term “termination” is not adequate grounds upon which the requested relief can be granted. The Secretary further states that MSHA’s records indicate that Hocker received the proposed assessment by Federal Express on February 9, 2010. She also notes that although a delinquency notice was sent to the operator on April 29, 2010, Hocker did not file its request to reopen until it was contacted by a collection agency for the United States Treasury, and approximately five and one-half months after issuance of the delinquency letter.

Having reviewed Hocker’s request to reopen and the Secretary’s response thereto, we agree that the operator has failed to provide a sufficient basis for the Commission to reopen the penalty assessment. In addition, Hocker has failed to explain why it delayed more than five months after receiving the delinquency notice sent by MSHA to file its request to reopen.

Accordingly, we hereby deny without prejudice Hocker’s request to reopen. FKZ Coal Inc., 29 FMSHRC 177, 178 (Apr. 2007); Petra Materials, 31 FMSHRC 47, 49 (Jan. 2009). The words “without prejudice” mean that Hocker may submit another request to reopen Assessment No. 000210165.

Any amended or renewed request by the operator to reopen this assessment must be filed within 30 days of this order. Any such request filed after that time will be denied with prejudice.

Mary Lu Jordan, Chairman

Michael F. Duffy, Commissioner

Michael G. Young, Commissioner

Robert F. Cohen, Jr., Commissioner

Patrick K. Nakamura, Commissioner

Distribution:

Roy Hocker, Owner

Hocker Construction, LLP

4167 County Rd. 321

P.O. Box 627

Ignacio, CO 81137

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

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

Washington, D.C. 20001-2021