Secretary of Labor, MSHA v. Brody Mining, LLC
Secretary of Labor v. Brody Mining, LLC (FMSHRC WEVA 2013-674): Roof-bolter oil citations settled for $44,000
Apply this to your situation
This order from 2014 bound only the parties to this case; it isn't precedent. Ezel answers your situation under the current MSHA standards and Commission precedent, with citations.
Plain-English summary
MSHA cited two oil leaks on a Fletcher roof bolter and proposed total penalties of $71,400. Brody Mining would have presented evidence that its foreman reasonably believed the leaks did not require the machine's immediate removal from service and that the oil was unlikely to ignite or cause serious injury. The parties agreed to convert both enforcement actions to section 104(a) citations, reduce negligence to moderate, and cut each penalty from $35,700 to $22,000. Judge William S. Steele found the agreement appropriate under the Mine Act's penalty criteria. He approved a total settlement of $44,000.
Decision snapshot
- Governing provisions: 30 U.S.C. §§ 815(d) and 820(i)
- Outcome: Two roof-bolter oil citations were modified and settled for total penalties of $44,000.
- Key point: Evidence about a foreman's reasoned hazard assessment and the low likelihood of oil ignition supported reducing both negligence and penalties.
Full text (FMSHRC public release)
FEDERAL MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH REVIEW COMMISSION
FEDERAL MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH REVIEW
COMMISSION
OFFICE OF
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGES
7 PARKWAY CENTER, SUITE 290
875 GREENTREE ROAD
PITTSBURGH, PA 15220
TELEPHONE:
412-920-7240 / FAX: 412-920-8689
February 11, 2014
SECRETARY OF LABOR
MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH
ADMINISTRATION (MSHA),
Petitioner
v.
BRODY MINING, LLC,
Respondent
CIVIL PENALTY PROCEEDING
Docket No. WEVA 2013-674
A.C. No. 46-09086-314409
Mine: Brody Mine No. 1
ORDER TO MODIFY
DECISION
APPROVING SETTLEMENT
ORDER TO PAY
Before: Judge Steele
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. § 815(d). The Secretary proposed
penalties totaling $71,400.00 for the violations alleged in Docket No. WEVA 2013-674.
The parties have agreed to settle this docket for penalties totaling $44,000.00.
The Secretary requests that Citation
Nos. 3563916 and 3563917 be modified to 104(a) Citations with “Moderate”
negligence. This modification is requested because at hearing because the
Respondent would present evidence that in the experienced judgment of the
day-shift foreman, the cited oil leaks on the #409 Fletcher Roof Bolter did not
pose a hazard such that the machine had to be taken out of service immediately.
Therefore the foreman’s reasoned decision not to take the machine out of
service did not constitute high negligence. The Respondent would further
present evidence that the Roof Bolter was not likely to become hot enough to
ignite the leaked oil, and it was not reasonably likely that the accumulation
of oil would cause a mine fire or lead to serious injury. Based on this
additional information and the modifications above, the Secretary has requested
reductions in penalties in each Citation, from $35,700.00 to $22,000.00.
I have
considered the representations and documentation submitted in these cases, and
I conclude that the proffered settlement is appropriate under the criteria set
forth in section 110(i) of the Act.
WHEREFORE, the motion for approval of settlement is GRANTED.
It is further ORDERED that the operator pay a penalty of $44,000.00
within 30 days of this order.[1]
Upon receipt of payment, this case is DISMISSED.
/s/
William S. Steele
William S.
Steele
Administrative
Law Judge
Distribution:
Robert
Alan Kelly, Office of the Regional Solicitor, U.S. Dept. of Labor, 1100 Wilson Blvd., 22nd Floor West, Arlington, VA 22209-2247
Michael
T. Cimino, Jackson Kelly PLLC, 500 Lee St. East, Suite 1600, P.O. Box 533,
Charleston, WV 25322
/mzm
[1] Payment
should be sent to: MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH ADMINISTRATION, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF
LABOR, PAYMENT OFFICE, P. O. BOX 790390, ST. LOUIS, MO 63179-0390
Get today's answer for your situation
You just read what one judge decided for one employer in 2014, 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.