Ezel / Agency Decisions / west-88-312-r-alj
FMSHRC ALJ decision Docket WEST 88-312-R Decided February 17, 1989 Procedural Judge Michael A. Lasher, Jr.

FMC Wyoming Corporation

FMC Wyoming Corporation (FMSHRC WEST 88-312-R): Penalty-payment dismissal denied after mistake shown

Apply this to your situation

This order from 1989 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 1989
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 binding on the Commission in other cases. 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

FMC Wyoming contested a citation at the FMC Trona Mine and later paid a combined assessment covering that citation and three others. The Secretary moved to dismiss the contest based on the payment. FMC responded that the payment for the disputed citation was made by mistake and supported that position with an affidavit from its safety manager. Judge Michael A. Lasher, Jr. found that FMC had timely intended to contest the citation and denied the motion to dismiss.

Decision snapshot

  • Cited standards: None stated in the order
  • Outcome: The Secretary's motion to dismiss was denied, and FMC's timely contest could proceed.
  • Key point: Payment of a proposed penalty through mistake or inadvertence did not bar a timely contest when the operator intended to challenge the citation.

Full text (FMSHRC public release)

CCASE:
FMC WYOMING V. SOL (MSHA)
DDATE:
19890217
TTEXT:

Page 2

~273
Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission (F.M.S.H.R.C.)
Office of Administrative Law Judges

FMC WYOMING CORPORATION, CONTEST PROCEEDING
CONTESTANT
Docket No. WEST 88-312-R
v. Order No. 2648287; 7/13/88

SECRETARY OF LABOR, FMC Trona Mine
MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH
ADMINISTRATION (MSHA),
RESPONDENT

          ORDER DENYING SECRETARY OF LABOR'S
                   MOTION TO DISMISS

 On August 25, 1988, Contestant FMC mailed its Notice of

Contest herein; such was received August 30, 1988. Thereafter, in
November, 1988, the Secretary combined the proposed assessment
for the Citation involved here- No. 2648482 -- with three other
Citations. Such combined assessment for all four Citations was
paid by FMC in one check. Thereafter, on January 30, 1989, the
Secretary filed a Motion to dismiss, citing Old Ben Coal Company,
7 FMSHRC 205 (1985). In response thereto, FMC pointed out that
such payment for Citation 2648482 was made in error, and
supported such contention with an affidavit of its Safety
Manager, Julius Jones. Mr. Jones affidavit clearly indicates that
the payment of the proposed assessment for the subject Citation
was made in error. The Commission's decision in Old Ben, supra,
clearly points out that its ultimate conclusion that the contest
should be barred because of payment of the proposed penalty,
might have been different had the mine operator paid such penalty
by "mistake", rather than intentionally. I conclude in the
circumstances here that payment of the proposed penalty through
mistake or inadvertence does not bar a mine operator from
proceeding with its contest proceeding where such is timely
filed. There is no question in this record that Contestant did
indeed intend to contest the subject Citation. Accordingly, the
Secretary's Motion to Dismiss is denied.

                           Michael A. Lasher, Jr.
                           Administrative Law Judge

Get today's answer for your situation

You just read what one judge decided for one employer in 1989, 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.