K Y V Coal Company, Inc.
K Y V Coal Company, Inc. (FMSHRC WEVA 92-1103): Settlement approved for ventilation and dust-control violation
Apply this to your situation
This order from 1993 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.
Plain-English summary
MSHA alleged that K Y V Coal was not complying with its ventilation and dust-control plan because water-spray pressure was below the required level. Judge Paul Merlin approved the settlement for the originally assessed penalty of $903. He found the penalty appropriate for the serious violation under the six statutory criteria and ordered the operator to pay within 30 days.
Decision snapshot
- Cited standard(s): The decision does not identify a specific standard section.
- Outcome: The settlement was approved and K Y V Coal was ordered to pay $903.
- Key point: The operator accepted the full assessed penalty for the water-spray pressure violation.
Full text (FMSHRC public release)
SECRETARY OF LABOR, : CIVIL PENALTY PROCEEDING
MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH :
ADMINISTRATION (MSHA), : Docket No. WEVA 92-1103
Petitioner : A. C. No. 46-07622-03539
:
v. :
:
:
K Y V COAL COMPANY, INC., : No. 3
Respondent :
DECISION APPROVING SETTLEMENT
ORDER TO PAY
Before: Judge Merlin
The Solicitor has filed a motion to approve settlement of the
one violation involved in this matter. The originally assessed
amount was $903, and the proposed settlement is for $903. The
ventilation and dust control plan was not being complied with
because the pressure of the water sprays was less than required.
Upon review I find that $903 is an appropriate penalty for this
serious violation and that it is in accordance with the six
statutory criteria set forth in section 110(i) of the Act.
Accordingly, the recommended settlement is APPROVED and the
operator is ORDERED TO PAY $903 within 30 days of the date of this
decision.
Paul Merlin
Chief Administrative Law Judge
Distribution: (Certified Mail)
Tina C. Mullins, Esq., Office of the Solicitor, U.S. Department of
Labor, 4015 Wilson Blvd., Arlington, VA 22203
Ronald L. King, Esq., Robertson, Cecil, King & Pruitt, Drawer 1560,
Grundy, VA 24614
rdj
Get today's answer for your situation
You just read what one judge decided for one employer in 1993, 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.