FMSHRC ALJ decision Docket WEST 85-154-M, WEST 85-163-M Decided June 8, 1987 Settled Judge John J. Morris

Bert W. Bielz, Jr., and Richard McNeely

Bert W. Bielz, Jr., and Richard McNeely (FMSHRC WEST 85-154-M and WEST 85-163-M): Agent penalties settled at $2,200 each

Apply this to your situation

This order from 1987 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.

Currency note: this decision dates from 1987
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.
Final ALJ decision, not Commission precedent
This decision became final under the 40-day rule in 30 U.S.C. § 823(d)(1) because no later Commission review appears in the official index. It binds the parties but is not Commission precedent. 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

Bert W. Bielz, Jr., and Richard McNeely were charged as agents of Silver State Mining Corporation with knowingly authorizing, ordering, or carrying out violations involving 30 C.F.R. §§ 55.5-2 and 55.5-5. The operator had already been assessed penalties for those violations, and each respondent faced proposed penalties totaling $2,200. Judge John J. Morris approved the settlements, affirmed the Secretary's petitions, and assessed $2,200 against each respondent.

Decision snapshot

  • Cited standards: 30 C.F.R. §§ 55.5-2 and 55.5-5
  • Outcome: The settlements were approved and $2,200 was assessed in each docket.
  • Key point: Individual-agent proceedings under section 110(c) can result in separate civil penalties for the same underlying mine-safety violations.

Full text (FMSHRC public release)

CCASE:
SOL (MSHA) V. BERT BIELZ
DDATE:
19870608
TTEXT:


Page 2

~1076

        Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission
              Office of Administrative Law Judges

SECRETARY OF LABOR, CIVIL PENALTY PROCEEDINGS
MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH
ADMINISTRATION (MSHA), Docket No. WEST 85-154-M
PETITIONER A.C. No. 05-03695-05512 A

        v.                         Docket No. WEST 85-163-M
                                   A.C. No. 05-03695-05513 A

BERT W. BIELZ, JR.,
and RICHARD McNEELY, Silver State Mining Corporation's
RESPONDENTS
Iron Clad Mine

                   DECISION APPROVING SETTLEMENT

Before: Judge Morris

 These are consolidated civil penalty proceedings initiated

by the petitioner against respondents in accordance with the
Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977, 30 U.S.C. 801 et
seq.

 In Docket No. WEST 85Ä154ÄM respondent Bielz is charged in

Citation 2099741 as an agent of the corporate mine operator with
knowingly authorizing, ordering or carrying out the operator's
violations of the mandatory safety standards published at 30
C.F.R. 55.5Ä2 and 55.5Ä5.

 In WEST 85Ä163ÄM the same charges in Citation 2099742 are

pending against respondent McNeely as an agent of the corporate
mine operator.

 Under section 110(a) of the Act, the corporate mine operator

was assessed a civil penalty of $1,000 for its violation of 30
C.F.R. 55.5Ä2 and a civil penalty of $5,000 for its violation
of 55.5Ä5. See Secretary of Labor (MSHA) v. Silver State Mining
Corporation, FMSHRC Docket No. WEST 84Ä145ÄM. The case, decided
by Commission Administrative Law Judge Gary Melick on April 2,
1987 has not been appealed.

 In the present proceedings under section 110(c) of the Act,

a civil penalty of $200 for violating 30 C.F.R. 55.5Ä2 and a
civil penalty of $2,000 for violating 30 C.F.R. 55.5Ä5 were
proposed against each of the respondents herein.

 Respondents now desire to withdraw their contests in these

proceedings and they have tendered to the Secretary two separate
checks in the amount of $2,200 each, representing payment in full
of the proposed civil penalties herein.


Page 3

~1077
I have reviewed the proposed settlement and I find it is
reasonable and in the public interest. It should be approved.

    Accordingly, I enter the following:

                                ORDER

    1. The settlement is approved.

 2. In WEST 85Ä154ÄM the Secretary's petition is affirmed.
 For the violation of Citation 2099741 a civil penalty of

$200 is assessed.

 For the violation of Citation 2099742 a civil penalty of

$2,000 is assessed.

 3. In WEST 85Ä163ÄM the Secretary's petition is affirmed.
 For the violation of Citation 2099741 a civil penalty of

$200 is assessed.

 For the violation of Citation 2099742 a civil penalty of

$2,000 is assessed.

                                     John J. Morris
                                     Administrative Law Judge

Get today's answer for your situation

You just read what one judge decided for one employer in 1987, and it binds only those parties. Ezel checks the current MSHA standards and Commission precedent and answers your specific situation, with citations.

Opens in Ezel Pro. Every answer cites the authority it relies on.