Secretary of Labor v. Rockwell Mining, LLC (Commission decision, August 21, 2023)

Plain-English summary

Rockwell Mining asked to reopen two penalty assessments that became final after MSHA records showed delivery but the company did not file contests. The delivery confirmations were signed "C COVID," and Rockwell said no employee had received the assessments. After learning of the problem during a penalty-balance inquiry, Rockwell filed its motions about two weeks later and within three weeks of the delinquency notices. The Secretary did not oppose reopening. The Commission found good cause and good-faith prompt action, reopened both matters, and remanded them for further proceedings.

Decision snapshot

• Cited authority: 30 U.S.C. § 815(a); 29 C.F.R. §§ 2700.1(b), 2700.12, and 2700.28
• Outcome: Both assessments were reopened and remanded to the Chief Administrative Law Judge.
• Key point: Unclear delivery records and a prompt reopening motion after first notice can establish good cause, although future internal-processing failures may receive closer scrutiny.

Full text (FMSHRC public release)

FEDERAL
MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH REVIEW COMMISSION

1331
PENNSYLVANIA AVE., N.W., SUITE 520N

WASHINGTON,
DC 20004-1710

SECRETARY
OF LABOR,

MINE
SAFETY AND HEALTH       

ADMINISTRATION
(MSHA)           

v.

ROCKWELL
MINING, LLC

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

Docket
No. WEVA 2023-0197

A.C.
No. 46-09377-566429

Docket
No. WEVA 2023-0198

A.C.
No. 46-09427-566430

BEFORE: 
Jordan, Chair; Althen, Rajkovich, and Baker, Commissioners

ORDER

BY THE COMMISSION:

These
matters arise under the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977, 30 U.S.C. § 801 et seq. (2018) (“Mine Act”). On February 22, 2023, the Commission received from Rockwell Mining, LLC (“Rockwell”) two motions seeking to reopen penalty assessments that had become final orders of the Commission pursuant to section 105(a) of the Mine Act, 30 U.S.C. § 815(a). [1]

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 the proposed assessments were delivered to the operator via U.S. Postal Service on November 16, 2022. On December 16, 2022, the proposed assessments were deemed final orders of the Commission because the operator had not filed Notices of Contest within 30 days. On January 31, 2023, MSHA mailed delinquency notices to the operator.

Rockwell
asserts that it learned of the assessments on February 6, 2023, during an inquiry into its penalty balance. At that time, MSHA informed Rockwell that the assessments had been delivered on November 16, 2022 and that the signature block on the delivery confirmation read “C COVID.” Rockwell claims no employee received the assessments on November 16, 2022. The exact method of delivery confirmation is unclear. The Secretary of Labor does not oppose the request to reopen.

We note that the motion to reopen was
timely filed. The Commission has previously held that “[m]otions to reopen received within 30 days of an operator’s receipt of its first notice from MSHA that it has failed to timely file a notice of contest will be presumptively considered as having been filed within a reasonable amount of time.” Highland Mining Co., 31 FMSHRC 1313, 1316-17 (Nov. 2009). Here, the motion to reopen was filed on February 22, 2023, approximately two weeks after the conversation with MSHA and approximately three weeks after the delinquency notices were received. Therefore, the motion was filed within a reasonable amount of time.

Having
reviewed Rockwell’s requests and the Secretary’s responses, we find that the operator has demonstrated good cause for its failure to timely respond and acted in good faith by timely filing its request to reopen. [2] We also note the use of “C COVID” in the signature block, and recognize that mail delivery was affected by the unprecedented strain of the COVID-19 pandemic during the relevant timeframe. In the interest of justice, we hereby reopen these matters and remand them 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,
Chair

/s/ William I.
Althen

William I. Althen,
Commissioner

/s/ Marco M. Rajkovich,
Jr.

Marco M.
Rajkovich, Jr., Commissioner

/s/ Timothy J.
Baker

Timothy J. Baker,
Commissioner

Distribution:

Justin
K. Chandler, Esq.

Steptoe
& Johnson PLLC

707
Virginia Street East, 17 th Floor

PO
Box 1588

Charleston,
WV 25326-1588

[email protected]

Jonathan
R. Ellis, Esq.

Steptoe
& Johnson PLLC

707
Virginia Street East, 17 th Floor

PO
Box 1588

Charleston,
WV 25326-1588

[email protected]

April
Nelson, Esq.

Associate
Solicitor

Office
of the Solicitor

U.S.
Department of Labor

Division
of Mine Safety and Health

201
12th Street South, Suite 401

Arlington,
VA 22202

[email protected]

Emily
Toler Scott, Esq.

Counsel
for Appellate Litigation

Office
of the Solicitor

U.S.
Department of Labor

Division
of Mine Safety and Health

201
12th Street South, Suite 401

Arlington,
VA 22202

[email protected]

Melanie
Garris

USDOL/MSHA,
OAASEI/CPCO

201
12th Street South, Suite 401

Arlington,
VA 22202

[email protected]

Chief
Administrative Law Judge Glynn F. Voisin

Office
of the Chief Administrative Law Judge

Federal
Mine Safety Health Review Commission

1331
Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Suite 520N

Washington,
DC 20004-1710

[email protected]

[1] For the limited
purpose of addressing these motions to reopen, we hereby consolidate docket numbers WEVA 2023-0197 and WEVA 2023-0198 because they involve similar factual and procedural issues. 29 C.F.R. § 2700.12.

[2] In a June 29,
2023 Order in Docket No. WEVA 2022-0467 et al., Rockwell was put on notice that any future motions to reopen would be closely scrutinized for signs of an inadequate internal processing system. This motion was filed prior to that notice. Furthermore, the record does not indicate whether the mistake in this instance was with the U.S. Postal Service’s delivery and confirmation process, Rockwell’s receipt process, or simply a fluke. Nevertheless, we reiterate that any future requests to reopen which indicate a failure of Rockwell’s internal processing system and fail to describe good faith measures to improve that system may be denied.