Ezel / Agency Decisions / west-93-117-m-alj
FMSHRC ALJ decision Docket WEST 93-117-M, WEST 93-141-M, WEST 93-408-M, WEST 93-409-M, WEST 93-462-M, WEST 93-62-M, WEST 93-406-M, WEST 93-407-M, WEST 93-463-M Decided May 28, 1996 Settled Judge August F. Cetti

Contractors Sand & Gravel Supply, Incorporated

Contractors Sand & Gravel Supply, Incorporated (FMSHRC WEST 93-117-M): Settlement approved for $1,950

Apply this to your situation

This order from 1996 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 1996
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

Contractors Sand & Gravel Supply faced consolidated civil-penalty proceedings involving alleged safety violations at its Scott River and Montague plants. After earlier default proceedings were reopened and remanded, the parties proposed a settlement covering the remaining citations. Judge August F. Cetti approved the settlement, which reduced proposed penalties on 12 citations and left 15 unchanged, for a total penalty of $1,950. The company was ordered to pay within 30 days, after which the proceedings would be dismissed.

Decision snapshot

  • Cited standards: 30 C.F.R. Part 56 standards, including §§ 56.14107(a), 56.12013, 56.14132(b)(1), 56.14109(b), 56.14109, 56.5050(b), 56.4200, 56.4402, 56.12028, 56.14112, 56.14112(a), 56.15001, 56.18002, 56.14100, 56.12041, 56.12032, and 56.12020.
  • Outcome: The settlement was approved, the agreed penalty was $1,950, and payment would dismiss the proceedings.
  • Key point: The ALJ approved a settlement after reviewing the pleadings, prehearing materials, affidavits, and deposition transcripts.

Full text (FMSHRC public release)

FEDERAL MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH REVIEW COMMISSION
1244 SPEER BOULEVARD #280
DENVER, CO 80204-3582
303-844-3993/FAX 303-844-5268

                           May 28, 1996

SECRETARY OF LABOR, : CIVIL PENALTY PROCEEDINGS
MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH :
ADMINISTRATION (MSHA), : Docket No. WEST 93-62-M
Petitioner : A.C. No. 04-03404-05509
:
v. : Docket No. WEST 93-406-M
: A.C. No. 04-03404-05510
CONTRACTORS SAND & GRAVEL :
SUPPLY, INCORPORATED, : Docket No. WEST 93-407-M
Respondent : A.C. No. 04-03404-05511
:
: Docket No. WEST 93-463-M
: A.C. No. 04-03404-05512
:
: Scott River Plant
:
: Docket No. WEST 93-117-M
: A.C. No. 04-04679-05506
:
: Docket No. WEST 93-141-M
: A.C. No. 04-04679-05507
:
: Docket No. WEST 93-408-M
: A.C. No. 04-04679-05508
:
: Docket No. WEST 93-409-M
: A.C. No. 04-04679-05509
:
: Docket No. WEST 93-462-M
: A.C. No. 04-04679-05510
:
: Montague Plant

         DECISION AFTER REMAND APPROVING SETTLEMENT

Before: Judge Cetti

 These consolidated civil penalty proceedings are before me

upon petitions for assessment of civil penalty under section
105(d) of the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977, 30
U.S.C. ' 801 et seq., (Mine Act). The Secretary of Labor on be-
half of the Mine Safety and Health Administration, charged the

Page 2

operator of the Scott River Plant and Montague Plant with
numerous violations of safety standards set forth in Part 56,
Title 30, Code of Federal Regulations.
A Default Decision was issued July 21, 1994, when there was
no response to my Show Cause Order. Thereafter, the Commission
reopened the matter and vacated the Default Decision and remanded
the matter to this Judge.

 Respondent then obtained counsel who filed a timely answer

contesting the alleged violations. The matter was set for hear-
ing which had to be canceled because of the medical condition of
the principal witness. The parties then filed cross motions for
summary decision. On March 25, 1996, I issued a Summary Decision
vacating Citation No. 3911909 in Docket Nos. WEST 93-462-M and
WEST 94-409-M and dismissing WEST 94-409-M.

 At this time, the remaining consolidated cases are before me

on petitions for assessment of civil penalties under section
105(d) of the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977, 30
U.S.C. ' 815(d). The parties, by counsel, filed an amended
motion to approve a settlement agreement of all the remaining
citations. Under the proffered settlement there is a reduction
in the amount of the proposed penalties for 12 of the citations
and no changes in the original proposed penalties for 15 of the
citations as follows:

              Health and Safety    Original     Proposed
                Standard Cited     Proposed     Amended

Citation No. (CFR Title 30) Penalty Penalty

3911911          56.14107(a)      $3,000.00    $    100.00
3636680          56.12013            267.00         100.00
3911916          56.12013          1,457.00         100.00
3911919          56.14132(b)(1)      987.00         100.00
3636674          56.14109(b)         168.00         100.00
3636675          56.14107(a)         220.00        100.00
3636676          56.14109           168.00         100.00
3914031          56.5050(b)           50.00         50.00
3911912          56.4200              50.00          50.00
3911914          56.4402               50.00         50.00
3911917          56.12013              50.00         50.00
3913895          56.12028            382.00         100.00
3913890          56.14112            147.00         100.00
3913891          56.14112(a)         147.00         100.00
3913892          56.15001              50.00         50.00
3913893          56.18002              50.00         50.00
3913894          56.14100              50.00         50.00
3913897          56.14107              50.00         50.00


                           2

Page 3

3913883           56.15001           50.00          50.00
3911799           56.12041            50.00          50.00
3911903           56.12032           50.00          50.00
3911907           56.14107(a)        119.00         100.00
3911901           56.4200             50.00          50.00
3911904           56.14107(a)         50.00          50.00
3911905           56.14109(b)         50.00          50.00
3911902           56.12013            50.00          50.00
3911906           56.12020           337.00         100.00

                                       TOTAL   $1,950.00

 Under the proffered settlement agreement it is also agreed

that, with the exception of those claims for fees and expenses
set forth in Docket No. EAJ 96-3 filed with the Commission on
April 24, 1996, each side shall bear its own costs and legal
fees.

 I have considered the representations and documentation in-

cluding the pleadings, the detailed responses to the prehearing
orders, the affidavits and various transcripts of the depositions
submitted in this case, and I conclude that the proffered settle-
ment is appropriate under the criteria set forth in section
110(i) of the Act.

 WHEREFORE, the motion for approval of settlement is GRANTED,

and it is ORDERED that Respondent, Contractors Sand and Gravel
Supply, Inc., PAY a penalty of $1,950.00 to the Secretary of
Labor within 30 days of this decision.

 Payment shall be made to the Office of Assessments, Mine

Safety and Health Administration, P.O. Box 160250-M, Pittsburgh,
Pennsylvania 15251. Upon receipt of payment, the above-captioned
proceedings are dismissed.

                         August F. Cetti
                         Administrative Law Judge

Distribution:

Steven R. DeSmith, Esq., Office of the Solicitor, U.S. Department
of Labor, 71 Stevenson Street, Suite 1110, San Francisco, CA
94105

                           3

Page 4

C. Gregory Ruffennach, Esq., RUFFENNACH LAW OFFICES, 1675 Broad-
way, Suite 1800, Denver, CO 80202

\sh

                           4

Get today's answer for your situation

You just read what one judge decided for one employer in 1996, 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.