Secretary of Labor v. Premier Magnesia, LLC (Commission decision, April 30, 2015)

Secretary of Labor v. Premier Magnesia, LLC (FMSHRC WEST 2014-108-M): Missing contest reopened after prompt inquiry

Decision type
Commission decision
Docket
WEST 2014-108-M
Decided
April 30, 2015
Outcome
Procedural
Precedential status
Citable Commission precedent
Checked against source
2026-08-02

Apply this precedent to your situation

This is citable Commission precedent from 2015, and it may have been appealed since. Ezel checks how it stands today and answers your situation, with citations.

Currency note: this decision dates from 2015
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.
Decision of the Commission
This is a decision of the Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission, the highest level of agency review, citable as Commission precedent. It may have been appealed to a U.S. Court of Appeals after issuance under 30 U.S.C. § 816; check subsequent history before relying on it. 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

Premier Magnesia said it timely contested ten citations and mailed payment for nine uncontested citations. MSHA had no record of receiving the contest, although its payment office received a check dated before the deadline. Premier discovered the problem from a delinquency letter and promptly contacted MSHA's civil-penalty office. The Secretary did not oppose reopening but urged the operator to strengthen its contest procedures. The Commission reopened the assessment in the interest of justice and remanded the case, directing the Secretary to file a penalty petition within 45 days.

Decision snapshot

  • Governing provisions: 30 U.S.C. § 815(a) and 29 C.F.R. § 2700.28
  • Outcome: The final penalty assessment was reopened and remanded to the Chief Administrative Law Judge.
  • Key point: A missing contest may be reopened when MSHA received a contemporaneous payment and the operator promptly investigated the first delinquency notice.

Full text (FMSHRC public release)

FEDERAL MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH REVIEW
COMMISSION

1331
PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE, NW, SUITE 520N

WASHINGTON,
D.C. 20004‑1710

SECRETARY
OF LABOR,

MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH  

ADMINISTRATION (MSHA)

v.

PREMIER
MAGNESIA, LLC

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

Docket
No. WEST 2014-108-M

A.C.
No. 26-00002-330163

BEFORE: 
Jordan, Chairman; Young and Nakamura, Commissioners[1]

ORDER

BY THE
COMMISSION: 

This
matter arises under the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977, 30 U.S.C.        § 801 et seq. (2012) (“Mine Act”).  On December 4, 2013, the Commission received from Premier Magnesia, LLC, (“Premier”) a motion 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 orders, the Commission has found guidance in Rule 60(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, under which the Commission may relieve a party from a final order of the Commission on the basis of mistake, inadvertence, excusable neglect, or other reason justifying relief.  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).

Records
of the Department of Labor’s Mine Safety and Health Administration (“MSHA”) indicate that the proposed assessment was delivered on August 22, 2013 and became a final order of the Commission on September 23, 2013.  Premier asserts that it timely contested ten citations and mailed payment for nine uncontested citations on September 18, 2013. Premier further states that it only discovered a problem with the contest after receiving a delinquency letter from MSHA on or about November 7, 2013 and promptly contacted MSHA’s Civil Penalty Compliance Office to inquire about the status of the contest.  Although the Secretary has no record of receiving Premier’s contest, MSHA received a check dated September 18, 2013 for an unspecified number of proposed penalties.  The Secretary does not oppose the request to reopen and urges the operator to take steps to ensure that future penalty contests are timely filed.

Having
reviewed Premier’s request and the
Secretary’s response, in the interest 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 G. Young

Michael G. Young, Commissioner

/s/ Patrick K. Nakamura

Patrick K. Nakamura, Commissioner

[1]
Commissioner Althen was
recused from this case.  Commissioner
Cohen has elected not to participate in this matter.

Does this precedent still control your case?

Ezel checks whether it still stands, including any court review since, and applies it to your situation 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