FMSHRC Commission decision Docket WEVA 2016-0061 Decided April 5, 2016 Remanded

Secretary of Labor v. Eastern Associated Coal, LLC

Secretary of Labor v. Eastern Associated Coal, LLC (FMSHRC WEVA 2016-0061): Unexplained processing error excused and assessment reopened

Apply this precedent to your situation

This is citable Commission precedent from 2016, 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 2016
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 Commission's own document.
Read the official release (fmshrc.gov)

Plain-English summary

Eastern Associated Coal missed the 30-day deadline to contest a proposed penalty assessment, attributing the failure to an undetermined clerical, mailing, or internal processing error. The Secretary did not oppose reopening but cautioned that the operator's office procedures were inadequate. Guided by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b) and the preference for resolving cases on their merits, the Commission reopened the final assessment in the interest of justice and remanded for penalty proceedings. It directed the Secretary to file a penalty petition within 45 days.

Decision snapshot

  • Governing authority: 30 U.S.C. § 815(a); 29 C.F.R. §§ 2700.1(b) and 2700.28
  • Outcome: The final penalty assessment was reopened and the matter was remanded to the Chief Administrative Law Judge.
  • Key point: A defaulted assessment may be reopened for excusable processing error even when the operator's procedures warrant correction.

Full text (FMSHRC public release)

FEDERAL MINE SAFETY AND
HEALTH REVIEW COMMISSION

1331 PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE, NW, SUITE 520N

WASHINGTON, DC 20004-1710

SECRETARY
OF LABOR,                             :                                     

MINE
SAFETY AND HEALTH                    :                                                         

ADMINISTRATION
(MSHA)                       :       

:

:        Docket No. WEVA 2016-0061

v.                                              
 :        A.C. No. 46-06448-389549     

:                   

EASTERN
ASSOCIATED COAL, LLC        :

BEFORE:
Jordan, Chairman; Young 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 October 6, 2015, the Commission received from Eastern
Associated Coal (“Eastern Associated”) 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 August 17, 2015, and became a
final order of the Commission on September 16, 2015. Eastern Associated asserts
that it its failure to timely contest the proposed assessment was due to an “undetermined
clerical or mailing error . . . [or a] a mistaken or otherwise inadvertent
internal processing error.” The Secretary does not oppose the request to reopen.
However, he states that his decision not to do so in this case should not be
construed as condoning the operator’s inadequate office procedures. The
Secretary urges Eastern Associated to take proposed assessments seriously in
the future.

Having
reviewed Eastern Associated’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/ William I.
Althen

William I.
Althen, Commissioner

[1] This case has
been delegated to a panel of three Commissioners pursuant to section 113(c) of
the Mine Act for the limited purpose of assessing the merits of the motion to
reopen.  30 U.S.C. § 823(c).

Get today's answer for your situation

You just read Commission precedent from 2016. Ezel checks whether it still stands, including any court review since, and answers your specific situation, with citations.

Opens in Ezel Pro. Every answer cites the authority it relies on.