Ezel / Agency Decisions / WEST 89-184-D

Mid-Continent Resources, Inc. (ALJ decision, May 22, 1989)

Mid-Continent Resources, Inc. (FMSHRC WEST 89-184-D and WEST 89-213-D): Settlement approved and discrimination claims dismissed

Decision type
ALJ decision
Dockets
WEST 89-184-D, WEST 89-213-D
Decided
May 22, 1989
Presiding judge
John J. Morris
Outcome
Settled
Precedential status
Final order, not precedent
Checked against source
2026-08-17
Cited standards
30 U.S.C. § 801 30 U.S.C. § 815(c) 29 C.F.R. § 2700.12 29 C.F.R. § 2700.44 30 U.S.C. § 823(d)(1)
Official source
Read the official release (fmshrc.gov)
PDF
View Official PDF

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 order, not Commission precedent
This decision by a FMSHRC Administrative Law Judge became the final decision of the Commission 40 days after issuance because the Commission did not direct review (30 U.S.C. § 823(d)(1)). 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

Manuel L. Gomez brought a temporary-reinstatement request and a discrimination complaint against Mid-Continent Resources involving the Dutch Creek Mine. Before the merits hearing concluded, the parties reached a settlement. Gomez agreed to withdraw the temporary-reinstatement request, waive reinstatement, and dismiss his claims. Mid-Continent agreed to pay him $4,500. Judge John J. Morris approved the settlement, dismissed both proceedings, and ordered payment within seven days.

Decision snapshot

  • Cited authority: 30 U.S.C. § 801, 30 U.S.C. § 815(c), and 29 C.F.R. §§ 2700.12 and 2700.44
  • Outcome: The settlement was approved, the temporary-reinstatement request and discrimination complaint were dismissed, and Mid-Continent was ordered to pay $4,500 within seven days.
  • Key point: The judge approved the parties' agreed resolution after finding the settlement proper.

Full text (FMSHRC public release)

CCASE:
SOL (MSHA) V. MID-CONTINENT RESOURCES
DDATE:
19890522
TTEXT:

Page 2

~910
Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission (F.M.S.H.R.C.) Office of Administrative Law Judges

SECRETARY OF LABOR,
DISCRIMINATION PROCEEDING
MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH
ADMINISTRATION (MSHA),
Docket No. WEST 89-184-D
ON BEHALF OF MANUEL L. GOMEZ,
DENV CD 89-06
COMPLAINANT
Docket No. WEST 89-213-D
v. (Consolidated)

MID-CONTINENT RESOURCES,
Dutch Creek Mine
INC.,
RESPONDENT

DECISION

Appearances: Margaret A. Miller, Esq., Office of the Solicitor, U.S. Department of Labor, Denver, Colorado, for Complainant;
Edward Mulhall, Jr., Esq., Delaney & Balcomb, Glenwood Springs, Colorado, for Respondent.

Before: Judge Morris

These cases arise under the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977, 30 U.S.C. 801 et seq., (the "Act").

Complainant has filed an application for reinstatment pursuant to Commission Rule 44, 29 C.F.R. 2700.44 and he has further filed a discrimination complaint pursuant to section 105(c) of the Act.

After notice to the parties a hearing on the merits commenced in Glenwood Springs, Colorado on May 17, 1989.

At the commencement of the hearing the parties moved for the consolidation of the above cases. Pursuant to Commission Rule 12, 29 C.F.R. 2700.12, the cases were consolidated.

The parties further advised the judge that they had reached an amicable settlement of the issues in contest.

The terms of the proposed settlement are that complainant will withdraw his application for temporary reinstatement and further waive any reinstatement and dismiss his claims herein. Further, in consideration thereof, respondent agrees to pay complainant the sum of $4,500.00.

Page 3

~911
Discussion

Complainant appeared with the Solicitor, his counsel, and stated that he understood the settlement and he further requested that the proposal be approved.

I find the settlement is proper particularly since all parties are in agreement.

Accordingly, I enter the following:

ORDER

1. The settlement agreement is approved.

2. The request for temporary reinstatement in WEST 89-184-D is dismissed.

3. The complaint of discrimination in WEST 89-213-D is dismissed.

4. Respondent is ordered to pay to complainant the sum of $4,500.00 within 7 days of the date of this decision.

John J. Morris
Administrative Law Judge

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