Secretary of Labor v. Lake Fork Gravel, Inc. (ALJ decision, March 13, 1985)
Secretary of Labor v. Lake Fork Gravel, Inc. (FMSHRC WEST 84-53-M): Six proposed penalties assessed after default
Apply this to your situation
This order from 1985 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.
Plain-English summary
MSHA sought penalties for six alleged violations at Lake Fork Gravel's pit. Judge Michael A. Lasher Jr. found that the company had not answered a show cause order, met prehearing requirements, or shown good cause for those failures. He entered a default and found that the company had waived its right to a hearing and to contest the proposed penalties. The judge canceled the scheduled hearing and ordered the company to pay $154 within 30 days. The decision lists the six citation numbers and penalties but does not describe the underlying safety standards.
Decision snapshot
- Cited standard: The decision does not identify the standards for the six citations.
- Outcome: Default entered; six proposed penalties assessed, totaling $154.
- Key point: Failure to respond to the show cause order and prehearing requirements led to assessment of the proposed penalties.
Full text (FMSHRC public release)
CCASE:
SOL (MSHA) V. LAKE FORK PIT
DDATE:
19850313
TTEXT:
~414
Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission Office of Administrative Law Judges
SECRETARY OF LABOR,
CIVIL PENALTY PROCEEDING
MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH
ADMINISTRATION (MSHA),
Docket No. WEST 84-53-M
PETITIONER
A.C. No. 10-01249-05501
v. Lake Fork Pit
LAKE FORK GRAVEL, INC.,
RESPONDENT
ENTRY OF DEFAULT AND FINAL DECISION
AND ORDER OF ASSESSMENT
Before: Judge Lasher
Respondent, Lake Fork Gravel, Inc., has failed to respond to my Order to Show Cause dated February 26, 1985. Respondent has also failed to comply with the Prehearing Requirements set forth in the Notice of Hearing herein dated February 7, 1985, in two respects. First, it has failed to respond to initiatives of counsel for the Petitioner, Rochelle Kleinberg, to communicate with it to comply with such requirements.(Footnote.1) Secondly, Respondent has failed to file with the undersigned the written submissions required by the second paragraph of such prehearing requirements. Thus, Respondent effectively has become unreachable by all reasonable processes of communication and has otherwise failed to establish good cause for its various failures to comply with standard prehearing requirements. Accordingly, it is found to be in default and to have waived its right to a hearing and to contest the proposed penalties for the 6 violations alleged and described in Petitioner's Proposal for Assessment of Penalty. 29 C.F.R. 2700.63.
~415
It is therefore ordered that the hearing scheduled to commence in Boise, Idaho, on March 19, 1985, be CANCELLED, and that Respondent pay the following penalties, totaling $154.00, to the Secretary of Labor within 30 days from the date hereof:
Citation Number Penalty
2225896 $ 54.00
2225897
20.00
2225898
20.00
2225899
20.00
2225900
20.00
2226501
20.00
Total $154.00
Michael A. Lasher, Jr.
Administrative Law Judge
ÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ
Footnotes start here:-
~Footnote_one
1 Counsel for the Secretary has advised me on March 11, 1985, that she has called Respondent's Sacramento, California phone number (916) 929-4245)) on two occasions, 2/12/85 and 2/19/85, and left messages but that Respondent has failed to return these calls; Counsel has also tried to reach Respondent on numerous occasions at its Idaho number (208) 634-2158)) to no avail.
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.
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