Clean Harbors Environmental Services, Inc. (Commission decision, September 8, 2011)

Plain-English summary

Clean Harbors missed a contest deadline after MSHA addressed the assessment to a former employee, delaying delivery to the company's general counsel. Outside counsel filed a notice that the general counsel mistakenly believed was timely, and the company moved to reopen within 30 days of receiving a delinquency letter. The Secretary did not oppose relief but reminded the company that it was responsible for keeping its contractor contact information current. The Commission reopened the assessment and remanded it for further proceedings.

Decision snapshot

• Governing provisions: 30 U.S.C. § 815(a); 29 C.F.R. §§ 2700.1(b), 2700.28
• Outcome: The final assessment was reopened and remanded.
• Key point: A delayed internal delivery may support reopening, but operators remain responsible for keeping MSHA's contact records current.

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

September 8, 2011

SECRETARY OF LABOR,

MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH

ADMINISTRATION (MSHA)

v.

CLEAN HARBORS ENVIRONMENTAL

SERVICES, INC.

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

Docket No. WEST 2011-748-M

A.C. No. 02-00137-242182

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 March 17, 2011, the Commission received from Clean Harbors Environmental Services, Inc. (“Clean Harbors”) a motion made by counsel seeking 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, 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).

The record indicates that the proposed assessment was delivered on January 3, 2011, and became a final order of the Commission on February 2, 2011. Clean Harbors asserts that the proposed assessment was addressed to a former employee, which delayed the delivery to the general counsel. Clean Harbors further states that its outside counsel served what the general counsel mistakenly believed to be a timely Notice of Contest on February 14, 2011. Clean Harbors filed a motion to reopen within 30 days of receiving a delinquency letter from MSHA. The Secretary does not oppose the request to reopen. The Secretary notes, however, that all proposed assessments are mailed to the address of record on the Contractor ID Report. It is Clean Harbors’ responsibility to keep MSHA informed of changes in its address of record and contact names on its legal identity report.

Having reviewed Clean Harbors’ 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.

/s/ Mary Lu Jordan  

Mary Lu Jordan, Chairman

/s/ Michael F. Duffy

Michael F. Duffy, Commissioner

/s/ Michael G. Young

Michael G. Young, Commissioner

/s/ Robert F. Cohen, Jr.

Robert F. Cohen, Jr., Commissioner

/s/ Patrick K. Nakamura

Patrick K. Nakamura, Commissioner

Distribution:

Dale B. Rycraft, Jr., Esq.

Gordon Silver, Attorneys At Law

One East Washington Street, Suite 400

Phoenix, AZ 85004

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

US Department of Labor

1100 Wilson Blvd. 25th Floor

Arlington, VA 22209

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