Ezel / Agency Decisions / weva-86-215-r-alj
FMSHRC ALJ decision Docket WEVA 86-215-R, WEVA 86-239-R, WEVA 86-240-R, WEVA 86-328, WEVA 86-329 Decided April 8, 1987 Settled Judge James A. Broderick

Consolidation Coal Company

Consolidation Coal Company (FMSHRC WEVA 86-215-R, et al.): Corrected settlement approved for $1,075

Apply this to your situation

This order from 1987 bound only the parties to this case; it isn't precedent. Ask about your situation and see what the current MSHA standards and Commission precedent say, with citations.

Currency note: this decision dates from 1987
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.
Final ALJ decision approving a settlement, not Commission precedent
This decision became final under the 40-day rule in 30 U.S.C. § 823(d)(1) because no later Commission review appears in the official index. It binds the parties but is not Commission precedent. 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

Consolidation Coal Company faced three contest proceedings and two related civil penalty proceedings concerning conditions at the Humphrey No. 7 Mine. The corrected decision states that three violations were originally assessed at $2,000 total and that the parties agreed to a $1,075 settlement. One order concerning a missing feeder-wire switch handle was changed from a section 104(d)(2) order to a section 104(a) citation, with its penalty reduced from $650 to $150. The other reductions brought a junction-box penalty from $650 to $450 and a clearance-space penalty from $700 to $475. Judge James A. Broderick approved the settlement and dismissed the contest proceedings after the respondent paid.

Decision snapshot

  • Cited standards: 30 C.F.R. §§ 75.1725, 75.1725(d), and 75.1403-8(d)
  • Outcome: The corrected settlement was approved for $1,075, one enforcement action was modified, and the related contest proceedings were dismissed.
  • Key point: The corrected decision superseded the earlier $1,325 amount and approved the parties' revised $1,075 settlement.

Full text (FMSHRC public release)

CCASE:
CONSOLIDATION COAL V. SOL (MSHA)
DDATE:
19870408
TTEXT:

Page 2

~717

        Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission
              Office of Administrative Law Judges

CONSOLIDATION COAL COMPANY, CONTEST PROCEEDINGS
CONTESTANT
v. Docket No. WEVA 86-215-R
Order No. 2711104; 2/27/86
SECRETARY OF LABOR,
MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH Docket No. WEVA 86-239-R
ADMINISTRATION (MSHA), Order No. 2713431; 3/14/86
RESPONDENT
Docket No. WEVA 86-240-R
Order No. 2711566; 3/20/86

                                    Humphrey No. 7 Mine

SECRETARY OF LABOR, CIVIL PENALTY PROCEEDINGS
MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH
ADMINISTRATION (MSHA), Docket No. WEVA 86-328
PETITIONER A.C. No. 46-01453-03701
v.
Docket No. WEVA 86-329
CONSOLIDATION COAL COMPANY, A.C. No. 46-01453-03702
RESPONDENT
Humphrey No. 7 Mine

                  CORRECTED DECISION APPROVING
              SETTLEMENT AND DISMISSING PROCEEDINGS

Before: Judge Broderick

 The Secretary's Motion to Approve Settlement in the above

cases stated that an agreed settlement had been reached between
the parties in the amount of $1325. This was in error, and the
error was repeated in my decision. The decision issued March 5,
1987, is CORRECTED to read as follows:

 On February 19, 1987, the Secretary filed a motion for an

order approving a settlement agreement in the two civil penalty
cases listed above. Three violations are involved originally
assesed at a total of $2000. The parties propose to settle for a
total payment of $1075.

 Order 2711566 was issued alleging a violation of 30 C.F.R.

75.1725 because a feeder wire cut off switch handle was missing.
The motion states that the violation should not have been deemed
unwarrantable and the action has been modified from a

Page 3

~718
section 104(d)(2) order to a section 104(a) citation. Because the
negligence factor has been reduced, the parties propose a
reduction in the penalty from $650 to $150. Order 2713431 alleged
a violation of 30 C.F.R. 75.1725(d) because a junction box on a
portal bus motor was open. The bus had not been operated for a
week, and the operator has a practice of checking buses before
putting them to use. For that reason the motion proposes a
reduction in the penalty from $650 to $450. Order No. 2711104
charged a violation of 30 C.F.R. 75.1403Ä8(d) because the
clearance space on the side at the underground shop switch had
sloughage and dirt on the bottom. The parties propose a reduction
in the penalty from $700 to $475 because the sloughage was on the
tight side of the track and not on the side with the walkway.

 I have considered the motion in the light of the criteria in

section 110(i) of the Act and conclude that it should be
approved.

 Acordingly, the settlement is APPROVED and, Respondent

having paid, the case is DISMISSED.

 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the contest proceedings, Docket

Nos. WEVA 86Ä215-R, WEVA 86-239-R, and WEVA 86-240-R are with the
consent of the parties DISMISSED.

                                  James A. Broderick
                                  Administrative Law Judge

Get today's answer for your situation

You just read what one judge decided for one employer in 1987, 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.