FMSHRC Commission decision Docket YORK 2010-355-M Decided September 14, 2012 Remanded

Cumberland Sand and Gravel, LLC

Cumberland Sand and Gravel, LLC (FMSHRC YORK 2010-355-M): Default reopened after docket-number typo

Apply this precedent to your situation

This is citable Commission precedent from 2012, and it may have been appealed since. Ezel checks how it stands today and answers your situation, with citations.

Currency note: this decision dates from 2012
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.
Decision of the Commission
This is a decision of the Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission, the highest level of agency review, citable as Commission precedent. It may have been appealed to a U.S. Court of Appeals after issuance under 30 U.S.C. § 816; check subsequent history before relying on it. 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 Commission's own document.
Read the official release (fmshrc.gov)

Plain-English summary

Cumberland Sand and Gravel defaulted after failing to answer the Secretary's penalty petition. The company said it had timely responded to the later show-cause order, but its response contained a typographical error in the docket number. Cumberland supplied its communications and certified-mail receipts, and the Secretary did not oppose relief. The Commission reopened the proceeding, vacated the default order, and remanded the case for further proceedings.

Decision snapshot

  • Cited provisions: 30 U.S.C. §§ 801 and 823(d); 29 C.F.R. §§ 2700.1(b), 2700.69(b), and 2700.70(a)
  • Outcome: The default order was vacated, and the case was remanded to the Chief Administrative Law Judge.
  • Key point: A timely show-cause response may support reopening when a docket-number typo prevented it from being credited to the correct case.

Full text (FMSHRC public release)

Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission

FEDERAL MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH REVIEW COMMISSION

1331 PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE, NW, SUITE 520N

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20004-1710                        

September 14, 2012

SECRETARY OF LABOR,                                

MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH                       

ADMINISTRATION (MSHA) 

v.

CUMBERLAND SAND AND GRAVEL, LLC 

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

Docket No. YORK 2010-355-M

A.C. No. 28-01034-230057 A0310

BEFORE: Jordan, Chairman; Young and Nakamura, Commissioners

ORDER

BY THE COMMISSION:

This matter arises under the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977, 30 U.S.C.
§ 801 et seq. (2006) (“Mine Act”). On February 23, 2012, the Commission received from
Cumberland Sand and Gravel, LLC (“Cumberland”) a motion seeking to reopen a penalty
assessment proceeding and relieve it from the default order entered against it.

On May 10, 2011, Chief Administrative Law Judge Lesnick issued an Order to Show
Cause which by its terms became a Default Order if the operator did not file an answer within
30 days. This Order to Show Cause was issued in response to Cumberland’s failure to answer
the Secretary’s October 22, 2010 Petition for Assessment of Civil Penalty.

Cumberland asserts that it filed a timely response to the Show Cause Order which
included a typographical error in the case docket number. Cumberland submits copies of its
communications with the Commission, as well as certified mail receipts. The Secretary does not
oppose the request to reopen.

The judge’s jurisdiction in this matter terminated when the default occurred. 29 C.F.R.
§ 2700.69(b). Under the Mine Act and the Commission’s procedural rules, relief from a judge’s
decision may be sought by filing a petition for discretionary review within 30 days of its
issuance. 30 U.S.C. § 823(d)(2)(A)(i); 29 C.F.R. § 2700.70(a). If the Commission does not
direct review within 40 days of a decision’s issuance, it becomes a final decision of the
Commission. 30 U.S.C. § 823(d)(1). Consequently, the judge’s order here has become a final
decision of the Commission.

In evaluating requests to reopen final orders, the Commission has found guidance in Rule
60(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure under which, for example, a party could be entitled
to relief from a final order of the Commission on the basis of mistake, inadvertence, or excusable
neglect. See 29 C.F.R. § 2700.1(b) (“the Commission and its Judges shall be guided so far as
practicable by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure”); Jim Walter Res., Inc., 15 FMSHRC 782,
786-89 (May 1993) (“JWR”). We have also observed that default is a harsh remedy and that, if
the defaulting party can make a showing of good cause for a failure to timely respond, the case
may be reopened and appropriate proceedings on the merits permitted. See Coal Prep. Servs.,
Inc., 17 FMSHRC 1529, 1530 (Sept. 1995).

Having reviewed Cumberland’s request and the Secretary’s response, in the interest of
justice, we hereby reopen the proceeding and vacate the Default Order. Accordingly, this case is
remanded to the Chief Administrative Law Judge for further proceedings pursuant to the Mine
Act and the Commission’s Procedural Rules, 29 C.F.R. Part 2700.

/s/ Mary Lu Jordan

Mary Lu Jordan, Chair

/s/Michael G. Young

Michael G. Young, Commissioner

/s/ Patrick K. Nakamura

Patrick K. Nakamura, Commissioner

Distribution:

Michael P. Lardi Jr., President

Cumberland Sand & Gravel,, LLC

295 Pugh Mountain Rd.

Marion,, VA 24354

[email protected]

W. Christian Schumann, Esq.

Office of the Solicitor

U.S. Department of Labor

1100 Wilson Blvd., Room 2220

Arlington, VA 22209-2296

Melanie Garris

Office of Civil Penalty Compliance

MSHA

U.S. Dept. Of Labor

1100 Wilson Blvd., 25th Floor

Arlington, VA 22209-3939

Chief Administrative Law Judge Robert J. Lesnick

Federal Mine Safety & Health Review Commission

601 New Jersey Avenue, N. W., Suite 9500

Washington, D.C. 20001-2021

Get today's answer for your situation

You just read Commission precedent from 2012. Ezel checks whether it still stands, including any court review since, and answers your specific situation, with citations.

Opens in Ezel Pro. Every answer cites the authority it relies on.