Allied Chemical Corporation v. Secretary of Labor (MSHA) (ALJ decision, December 4, 1985)

Plain-English summary

Allied Chemical Corporation contested three MSHA citations concerning equipment at its Alchem Trona Mine. The parties agreed that Allied neither knew nor should have known of the equipment defects in light of MSHA's original certification and approval. Allied agreed to perform and certify weekly continuity checks of the grounding system while the equipment was in use, until an approved ground fault interrupter system became available. The Secretary asked to vacate the citations and Allied withdrew its contests. Judge John J. Morris approved the settlement, vacated all three citations, and dismissed the proceedings.

Decision snapshot

• Cited provision: 30 C.F.R. § 18.47(d)(2), referenced for an approved ground fault interrupter system.
• Outcome: Settlement approved; Citations Nos. 2083069, 2083070, and 2083071 vacated; three contests dismissed.
• Key point: The agreement resolved the equipment citations through vacation and interim grounding checks.

Full text (FMSHRC public release)

CCASE:
ALLIED CHEMICAL v. SOL (MSHA)
DDATE:
19851204
TTEXT:
~2060
Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission Office of Administrative Law Judges

ALLIED CHEMICAL CORPORATION, CONTEST PROCEEDINGS CONTESTANT
v. Docket No. WEST 84-114-RM
SECRETARY OF LABOR,
Citation No. 2083069; 6/13/84
MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH
ADMINISTRATION (MSHA),
Docket No. WEST 84-115-RM
RESPONDENT
Citation No. 2083070; 6/13/84

Docket No. WEST 84-116-RM
Citation No. 2083071; 6/21/84

Alchem Trona Mine

DECISION

Appearances: John A. Snow, Esq., VanCott, Bagley, Cornwall & McCarthy, Salt Lake City, Utah, for Contestant;
James H. Barkley, Esq. and Margaret Miller, Esq., Office of the Solicitor, U.S. Department of Labor, Denver, Colorado, for Respondent.

Before: Judge Morris

These are consolidated contest proceedings initiated by contestant against the Secretary of Labor in accordance with the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977, 30 U.S.C. 801 et seq (the Act).

A hearing on these cases and a case involving the same parties commenced on March 5, 1985, in Salt Lake City, Utah. At that time the parties filed a written settlement agreement and a motion seeking approval therefor.

The agreement recites that the contestant did not know of the defects in the equipment which is the subject of citations numbered 2083069, 2083070 and 2083071. It is further stipulated that the contestant should not have known of the defects in view of the original MSHA certification and approval of the cited equipment.

Contestant further agrees to perform and certify continuity of the groundings system on a weekly basis, if in use, as requested by MSHA, until an approved ground fault interrupter system is available as required by 30 C.F.R. 18.47(d)(2).
~2061
Based on the proposed settlement the Secretary of Labor moves to vacate his citations and contestant moves to withdraw its applications for review.

I have reviewed the proposed settlement agreement. I find it is reasonable and it should be approved.

Accordingly, I enter the following:

ORDER

1. The settlement agreement is approved.

2. In WEST 84-114-RM citation 2083069 is vacated and the contest proceeding is dismissed.

3. In WEST 84-115-RM citation 2083070 is vacated and the contest proceeding is dismissed.

4. In WEST 84-116-RM citation 2083071 is vacated and the contest proceeding is dismissed.

John J. Morris
Administrative Law Judge