O'Neal Machine & Repair, Inc. (ALJ decision, December 11, 1989)

O'Neal Machine & Repair, Inc. (FMSHRC WEVA 89-150): Settlement approved and $2,600 assessed

Decision type
ALJ decision
Docket
WEVA 89-150
Decided
December 11, 1989
Presiding judge
Outcome
Settled
Precedential status
Final order, not precedent
Checked against source
2026-08-16

Apply this to your situation

This order from 1989 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 1989
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

O'Neal Machine & Repair, Inc. was the respondent in a civil penalty proceeding involving Lobby No. 4 Mine. The parties proposed a settlement that reduced the penalty from $5,300 to $2,600. Judge Gary Melick found the settlement appropriate under the Mine Act's penalty criteria and ordered the company to pay $2,600 within 30 days.

Decision snapshot

  • Cited provisions: 30 U.S.C. § 815(d); 30 U.S.C. § 820(i)
  • Outcome: The settlement was approved and the penalty was reduced from $5,300 to $2,600.
  • Key point: The Judge approved the negotiated penalty reduction after considering the parties' representations and documentation.

Full text (FMSHRC public release)

~2528
Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission (F.M.S.H.R.C.) Office of Administrative Law Judges

SECRETARY OF LABOR,
CIVIL PENALTY PROCEEDING
MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH
Docket No. WEVA 89-150
ADMINISTRATION (MSHA),
A.C. No. 46-05976-03501 BCD
PETITIONER
Lobby No. 4 Mine
v.

O'NEAL MACHINE & REPAIR, INC.,
RESPONDENT

DECISION APPROVING SETTLEMENT

Before: Judge Melick

This case is before me upon a petition for assessment of civil penalty under Section 105(d) of the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977 (the Act). Petitioner has filed a motion to approve a settlement agreement and to dismiss the case. A reduction in penalty from $5,300 to $2,600 is proposed. I have considered the representations and documentation submitted in this case, and I conclude that the proffered settlement is appropriate under the criteria set forth in Section 110(i) of the Act.

WHEREFORE, the motion for approval of settlement is GRANTED, and it is ORDERED that Respondent pay a penalty of $2,600 within 30 days of this order.

Gary Melick
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