Cactus Canyon Quarries of Texas, Incorporated
Cactus Canyon Quarries of Texas, Incorporated (FMSHRC WEVA 2002-52): Settlement approved
Apply this to your situation
This order from 2003 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
The Secretary of Labor sought $1,800 in penalties for three alleged mine-safety violations at Cactus Canyon Quarries of Texas, Incorporated. At the hearing, the parties agreed to modify the allegations and keep the proposed penalties at $400, $500, and $900. Judge Irwin Schroeder found the settlement consistent with the Mine Safety Act and in the public interest. He approved the agreement, directed payment within 30 days, and dismissed the petition after payment.
Decision snapshot
- Cited standard(s): The order does not identify specific Mine Act standards.
- Outcome: The settlement was approved for a total civil penalty of $1,800, and the petition was to be dismissed after payment.
- Key point: The ALJ may approve a negotiated penalty settlement when it is consistent with the Mine Safety Act and the public interest.
Full text (FMSHRC public release)
CACTUS CANYON QUARRIES OF TEXAS, INCORPORATED -- April 15, 2003
FEDERAL MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH REVIEW COMMISSION
OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGES
601 New Jersey Avenue, NW, Suite 9500
Washington, DC 20001
April 15, 2003
SECRETARY OF LABOR, : CIVIL PENALTY PROCEEDING
MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH :
ADMINISTRATION (MSHA), : Docket No. WEVA 2002-52
Petitioner : A.C. No. 46-08593-03529
v. :
:
:
BAYLOR MINING, INC. :
Respondent : Jim's Branch No. 3A
DECISION APPROVING SETTLEMENT
Appearances: Toye A. Olarinde, Esq., U.S. Department of Labor, Office of the Solicitor, Arlington, Virginia, for the Petitioner;
David J. Hardy, Esq, Spilman, Thomas & Battle, PLLC, Charleston, WV, for the Respondent.
Before: Judge Schroeder
This matter is before me on a Petition by the Secretary for the assessment of a Civil
Penalty for the alleged violation of mine safety regulations. The Petition alleged three violations
for which the Secretary proposed a total Civil Penalty of $1,800.00.
Pursuant to notice, a hearing was convened in Charleston, West Virginia on April 2,
2003. Testimony was taken from the MSHA Inspector whose citation of violations began this
case. During the testimony, I was advised that the parties had reached agreement on a settlement.
Terms of the settlement were read into the record at the hearing. This order is intended to
summarize, approve, and implement the terms of their agreement.
For the violation identified by Citation 7201627, it was agreed the allegation will be
modified to a 104(a) citation with moderate negligence. The penalty to be paid will remain
$400.00. For the violation identified as Order 7201628, it was agreed the allegation will be
modified to a 104(a) citation with high negligence. The penalty to be paid will remain $500.00.
For the violation identified as Order 7201633, it was agreed the allegation will be modified to a
104(a) citation with moderate negligence and restated to identify the violation as a failure to
properly record an onshift examination. The penalty to be paid will remain $900.00. The total
Civil Penalty to be paid is $1,800.00.
I have reviewed the settlement agreement of the parties and I find the agreement to be
consistent with the Mine Safety Act and in the public interest. Therefore, it is
ORDERED that the joint motion of the parties to approve settlement is granted. The
Respondent is directed to pay within 30 days of the date of this Order a Civil Penalty of
$1,800.00, upon the appropriate modification of the citation documents which formed the basis
for this Petition. The parties are to bear their own costs, including any attorney fees. Upon
receipt of the Civil Penalty directed by this Order, the Petition is DISMISSED.
Irwin Schroeder
Administrative Law Judge
Distribution: (Certified Mail)
David J. Hardy, Esq., Spilman, Thomas & Battle, PLLC, P.O. Box 273, Charleston, WV 25321
Toye A. Olarinde, Esq., Office of the Solicitor, U.S. Department of Labor, 1100 Wilson Blvd.,
22nd Floor West, Arlington, VA 22209
Get today's answer for your situation
You just read what one judge decided for one employer in 2003, 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.