DCL Construction, Inc.
DCL Construction, Inc. (FMSHRC WEST 95-248-M): Settlement approved with penalty reduction
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.
Plain-English summary
DCL Construction faced one section 104(d)(1) citation and seven section 104(d)(1) orders. The parties asked the judge to approve a settlement reducing the proposed penalty from $6,700 to $4,690. The motion stated that the original penalty had been specially assessed and that DCL had no violations during the prior 24 months. Judge Richard W. Manning found the settlement appropriate under the Mine Act's penalty criteria and ordered DCL to pay $4,690 within 90 days.
Decision snapshot
- Cited provision(s): 30 C.F.R. § 100.5; 30 U.S.C. § 820(i)
- Outcome: Settlement approved and amended penalty of $4,690 ordered paid within 90 days.
- Key point: The judge approved a documented settlement that reduced the proposed penalty by $2,010.
Full text (FMSHRC public release)
FEDERAL MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH REVIEW COMMISSION
1244 SPEER BOULEVARD #280
DENVER, CO 80204-3582
303-844-3577/FAX 303-844-5268
April 14, 1996
SECRETARY OF LABOR, : CIVIL PENALTY PROCEEDING
MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH :
ADMINISTRATION (MSHA), : Docket No. WEST 95-248-M
Petitioner : A.C. No. 04-05257-05502
:
v. :
: Portable Crusher
DCL CONSTRUCTION, INC., :
Respondent :
DECISION APPROVING SETTLEMENT
Before: Judge Manning
This case is before me upon a petition for assessment of a
civil penalty under Section 105(d) of the Federal Mine Safety and
Health Act of 1977, 30 U.S.C. ' 801 et seq. (the "Act"). Peti-
tioner filed a motion to approve settlement and order payment of
an amended penalty. A reduction in penalty from $6,700.00 to
$4,690.00 for one section 104(d)(1) citation and seven section
104(d)(1) orders is proposed. The motion states that the orig-
inal proposed penalty was specially assessed under 30 C.F.R.
' 100.5 and that Respondent has a history of no violations during
the previous 24 months.
I have considered the representations and documentation sub-
mitted in this case, and I conclude that the proffered settlement
is appropriate under the criteria set forth in Section 110(i) of
the Act.
Accordingly, the motion for approval of settlement is
GRANTED, and Respondent is ORDERED TO PAY the Secretary of Labor
the sum of $4,690.00 within 90 days of the date of this decision.
Richard W. Manning
Administrative Law Judge
Distribution:
J. Mark Ogden, Esq., Office of the Solicitor, U.S. Department of
Labor, 300 N. Los Angeles St., #3247, Los Angeles, CA 90012-3381
Page 2
DCL CONSTRUCTION, INC., P.O. Box 1762, Salton City, CA 92275
RWM
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.