Ezel / Agency Decisions / WEVA 92-986

Oneida Coal Co., Inc. (ALJ decision, April 5, 1993)

Oneida Coal Co., Inc. (FMSHRC WEVA 92-986): Settlement addendum modifies negligence findings

Decision type
ALJ decision
Docket
WEVA 92-986
Decided
April 5, 1993
Outcome
Settled
Precedential status
Final order, not precedent
Checked against source
2026-08-14
Official source
Read the official release (fmshrc.gov)
PDF
View Official PDF

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.

Currency note: this decision dates from 1993
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 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

Oneida Coal Company, Inc. and the Secretary of Labor submitted an addendum describing their settlement of a civil penalty proceeding involving Oneida Mine No. 1. Under the agreement, the Secretary would change the negligence finding from moderate to none on Citation No. 3309235. The Secretary would also change the negligence finding from moderate to no finding on Citations Nos. 3110789 and 3110790. Oneida agreed to pay the penalty assessment, and the parties asked the judge to approve the settlement.

Decision snapshot

  • Cited standards: None stated in the official addendum.
  • Outcome: The parties moved for approval of a settlement that changed the negligence findings on three citations, with Oneida agreeing to pay the penalty assessment.
  • Key point: The proposed settlement reduced or removed the negligence findings without changing the citation numbers identified in the addendum.

Full text (FMSHRC public release)

CCASE:
SOL V. ONEIDA COAL
DDATE:
199304
TTEXT:

Page 2

~671

APPENDIX TO DECISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
FEDERAL MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH REVIEW CORPORATION

LYNN MARTIN, Secretary of Labor, ) CIVIL PENALTY PROCEEDING United States Department of Labor, ) )
)
Petitioner, ) Docket No. WEVA 92-986
v. ) No. 46-05243-03624
)
Oneida Coal Co., INC., ) Mine: Oneida Mine No. 1
) SOL No. 92-39276
)

ADDENDUM TO
JOINT MOTION FOR
APPROVAL OF SETTLEMENT

This day came the parties, by counsel, and represented to the Court that they have reached an agreement as to the issues to dispute herein whereby the Secretary agrees to modify its finding of.. negligence from "moderate" to "none" on Citation Number 3309235 and to modify its finding of negligence from "moderate" to "no finding" on Citations Number 3110789 and 3110790 and whereby Oneida Coal Company, Inc. agrees to pay the penalty assessment. Wherefore, the parties hereby move the Court for approval of their settlement.

Dated this
day of March, 1993

W. Henry Lawrence IV
Counsel for Respondent
Oneida Coal., Co., Inc.

Glen M. Loos, Esquire
Department of Labor
4015 Wilson Boulevard, Room 516
Arlington, Virginia 22203
Counsel for Petitioner
Secretary of Labor

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