Secretary of Labor v. Spartan Mining Company, Inc. (Commission decision, April 30, 2015)

Secretary of Labor v. Spartan Mining Company, Inc. (FMSHRC WEVA 2014-176): One-day-late contest reopened despite repeat history

Decision type
Commission decision
Docket
WEVA 2014-176
Decided
April 30, 2015
Outcome
Procedural
Precedential status
Citable Commission precedent
Checked against source
2026-08-02

Apply this precedent to your situation

This is citable Commission precedent from 2015, and it may have been appealed since. Ezel checks how it stands today and answers your situation, with citations.

Currency note: this decision dates from 2015
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.
Decision of the Commission
This is a decision of the Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission, the highest level of agency review, citable as Commission precedent. It may have been appealed to a U.S. Court of Appeals after issuance under 30 U.S.C. § 816; check subsequent history before relying on it. 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

Spartan Mining filed its penalty contest one day after the assessment became a final Commission order. The company attributed the late filing to a clerical error, and the Secretary did not oppose reopening. The Commission noted that this was Spartan's fourth reopening request in two years based on an untimely contest. It nevertheless reopened the assessment in the interest of justice and remanded the case for proceedings on the merits. The Secretary was directed to file a penalty petition within 45 days, and the operator was urged to improve its filing procedures.

Decision snapshot

  • Governing provisions: 30 U.S.C. § 815(a) and 29 C.F.R. § 2700.28
  • Outcome: The one-day-late final assessment was reopened and remanded to the Chief Administrative Law Judge.
  • Key point: The Commission granted relief for a clerical error but expressly noted the operator's repeated history of untimely contests.

Full text (FMSHRC public release)

FEDERAL MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH REVIEW
COMMISSION

1331
PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE, NW, SUITE 520N

WASHINGTON,
D.C. 20004‑1710

SECRETARY OF LABOR,

MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH   

ADMINISTRATION (MSHA)

v.

SPARTAN MINING COMPANY, INC.

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

Docket No.

A.C. No.

WEVA 2014-176

46-01544-331181

BEFORE: Jordan, Chairman; Young, Nakamura, and Althen, Commissioners[1]

ORDER

BY THE COMMISSION:

This matter arises under the
Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977, 30 U.S.C.    § 801 et seq. (2012) (“Mine Act”). On November 18, 2013, the Commission received from Spartan Mining Company, Inc. (“Spartan”) a motion seeking to reopen a penalty assessment that had 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 orders, the Commission has found guidance in Rule 60(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, under which the Commission may relieve a party from a final order of the Commission on the basis of mistake, inadvertence, excusable neglect, or other reason justifying relief. 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).

Records of the Department of Labor’s Mine Safety and Health Administration (“MSHA”) indicate that the proposed assessment was delivered on September 10, 2013, and became a final order of the Commission on October 10, 2013. Spartan asserts that due to a clerical error it contested the proposed assessment on October 11, 2013. The Secretary does not oppose the request to reopen, and urges the operator to take steps to ensure that future penalty contests are timely filed.[2]

Having reviewed Spartan’s request and the Secretary’s response, in the interest of justice, we hereby reopen this matter and remand it to the Chief Administrative Law Judge for further proceedings pursuant to the Mine Act and the Commission’s Procedural Rules, 29 C.F.R. Part 2700. Accordingly, consistent with Rule 28, the Secretary shall file a petition for assessment of penalty within 45 days of the date of this order. See 29 C.F.R. § 2700.28.

/s/ Mary Lu Jordan

Mary Lu Jordan, Chairman

/s/ Michael G. Young

Michael G. Young,
Commissioner

/s/ Patrick K. Nakamura

Patrick K.
Nakamura, Commissioner

/s/ William I. Althen

William I.
Althen, Commissioner

[1]
Commissioner Cohen has elected not
to participate in this matter.

[2] We note that this is the forth time in two years that Spartan has requested reopening of a penalty assessment because of its untimely filing of a notice of contest. See Inman Energy, 35 FMSHRC 26 (Jan. 2013); Spartan Mining Co., 35 FMSHRC 1298 (May 2013); Spartan Mining Co., 35 FMSHRC 2052 (July 2013).

Does this precedent still control your case?

Ezel checks whether it still stands, including any court review since, and applies it to your situation with citations.

Opens in Ezel Pro.

  • Checks the law as it stands today, not only this page
  • Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
  • Chat, drafting and research in one workspace