Secretary of Labor v. M & P Services, Inc. (Commission decision, December 10, 2009)

Plain-English summary

M & P Services marked its assessment form to contest a proposed penalty and mailed it by certified mail within the deadline. Its delivery record showed that MSHA received the envelope two days later, although MSHA's internal records did not contain the contest and the penalty was later listed as delinquent. M & P promptly sought reopening. The Secretary accepted the documented copy and filed a penalty petition. The Commission therefore found the reopening request moot and directed the case to proceed normally.

Decision snapshot

• Governing provision: 30 U.S.C. § 815(a)
• Outcome: The reopening request was moot because the documented contest was accepted and a penalty petition had been filed.
• Key point: Delivery evidence can preserve a timely contest even when the agency's internal record of the filing is missing.

Full text (FMSHRC public release)

Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission

FEDERAL MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH REVIEW COMMISSION

601 NEW JERSEY AVENUE, NW

SUITE 9500

WASHINGTON, DC 20001

December 10, 2009

SECRETARY OF LABOR,

MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH

ADMINISTRATION (MSHA)

v.

M & P SERVICES, INC.

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

Docket No. WEVA 2009-1983

A.C. No. 46-09131-188689

BEFORE: Jordan, Chairman; Duffy, Young, and Cohen, Commissioners

ORDER

BY THE COMMISSION:

This matter arises under the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977, 30 U.S.C.
§ 801 et seq. (2006) (“Mine Act”). On September 29, 2009, the Commission received from M & P Services, Inc. (“M & P”) a motion to reopen a penalty assessment that may have become a final order of the Commission pursuant to section 105(a) of the Mine Act, 30 U.S.C. § 815(a).

Under section 105(a) of the Mine Act, an operator who wishes to contest a proposed penalty must notify the Secretary of Labor no later than 30 days after receiving the proposed penalty assessment. If the operator fails to notify the Secretary, the proposed penalty assessment is deemed a final order of the Commission. 30 U.S.C. § 815(a).

We have held, however, that in appropriate circumstances, we possess jurisdiction to reopen uncontested assessments that have become final Commission orders under section 105(a). Jim Walter Res., Inc., 15 FMSHRC 782, 786-89 (May 1993) (“JWR”). In evaluating requests to reopen final section 105(a) orders, the Commission has found guidance in Rule 60(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure under which, for example, a party could be entitled to relief from a final order of the Commission on the basis of mistake, inadvertence, or excusable neglect. See 29 C.F.R. § 2700.1(b) (“the Commission and its Judges shall be guided so far as practicable by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure”); JWR, 15 FMSHRC at 787. We have also observed that default is a harsh remedy and that, if the defaulting party can make a showing of good cause for a failure to timely respond, the case may be reopened and appropriate proceedings on the merits permitted. See Coal Prep. Servs., Inc., 17 FMSHRC 1529, 1530 (Sept. 1995).

On June 18, 2009, the Department of Labor’s Mine Safety and Health Administration (“MSHA”) issued Proposed Assessment No. 000188689 to M & P, proposing a penalty for a citation that had been previously issued to the operator. According to its motion, M & P received the assessment, and its representative marked the form to indicate that it was contesting the proposed penalty. The notice of contest was apparently mailed on June 27, 2009, using certified mail. According to a copy of the on-line record of delivery submitted by M & P with its motion, the envelope that was mailed was received by MSHA two days later. Nevertheless, M & P later received a notice from MSHA, showing the penalty as delinquent, which caused M & P to promptly file its motion to reopen.

The Secretary of Labor states that, while she has no record of receiving the notice of contest, given the information provided by M & P, she will accept the copy of the notice of contest included with Blue Haven’s motion. On November 17, 2009, the Secretary filed a petition for assessment of penalty in this case.

Having reviewed M & P’s motion and the Secretary’s response, we find the request to reopen to be moot. This case shall proceed pursuant to the Mine Act and the Commission’s Procedural Rules, 29 C.F.R. Part 2700.

Mary Lu Jordan, Chairman

Michael F. Duffy, Commissioner

Michael G. Young, Commissioner

Robert F. Cohen, Jr., Commissioner

Distribution:

James F. Bowman

M & P Services, Inc.

P.O. Box 99

Midway, WV 25878

W. Christian Schumann, Esq.

Office of the Solicitor

U.S. Department of Labor

1100 Wilson Blvd., Room 2220

Arlington, VA 22209-2296

Myra James, Chief

Office of Civil Penalty Compliance

MSHA

U.S. Dept. of Labor

1100 Wilson Blvd., 25th Floor

Arlington, VA 22209-3939

Chief Administrative Law Judge Robert J. Lesnick

Federal Mine Safety & Health Review Commission

601 New Jersey Avenue, N. W., Suite 9500

Washington, D.C. 20001-2021