Wap Coal Company (ALJ decision, February 6, 1987)

Wap Coal Company (FMSHRC WEVA 86-430-D): Discrimination settlement approved and case dismissed

Decision type
ALJ decision
Docket
WEVA 86-430-D
Decided
February 6, 1987
Presiding judge
Outcome
Settled
Precedential status
Final order, not precedent
Checked against source
2026-08-22
Cited standards

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, not Commission precedent
This settlement order 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.
Transcribed from a scanned original: FMSHRC released this decision as an image-only file. The full text below is a machine transcription, proofread against the scan. Check the official release before quoting exact language.
Read the official release (fmshrc.gov)

Plain-English summary

Nicholas Ramirez brought a discrimination proceeding against Wap Coal Company. The parties filed a settlement agreement and jointly asked the judge to order compliance and dismiss the case. Judge William Fauver approved the motion, required the parties to comply with the settlement, and allowed either party to seek reopening if the other violated the agreement within the specified period. The proceeding was dismissed.

Decision snapshot

  • Governing provision: 30 U.S.C. § 815(c)
  • Outcome: The settlement was approved, compliance was ordered, and the proceeding was dismissed.
  • Key point: A settled discrimination proceeding may be dismissed while preserving a limited procedure to reopen for an alleged settlement breach.

Full text (FMSHRC public release)

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

SECRETARY OF LABOR,
DISCRIMINATION PROCEEDING
MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH
ADMINISTRATION (MSHA),
Docket No. WEVA 86-430-D
ON BEHALF OF
MSHA Case No. HOPE CD 86-09
NICHOLAS RAMIREZ,
COMPLAINANT
No. 21 Mine
v.

WAP COAL COMPANY,
RESPONDENT

DECISION APPROVING SETTLEMENT

Before: Judge Fauver

The parties have moved for approval of a settlement agreement, and an order directing compliance with the settlement agreement and dismissing this case.

FOR GOOD CAUSE SHOWN, the motion is GRANTED.

ORDER

WHEREFORE IT IS ORDERED that:

1. The parties will fully comply with the terms of the Settlement Agreement filed herein on January 30, 1987.

2. Any party to this proceeding may move to reopen this case for hearing and determination upon a complaint by such party alleging that, within 90 days of such complaint, the other party violated the terms of the Settlement Agreement herein and for an order granting appropriate relief.

3. Based upon the foregoing, this proceeding is DISMISSED.

William Fauver
Administrative Law Judge

What applies to your situation today?

This order bound one employer. Ezel checks the current MSHA standards and Commission precedent against your facts, 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