Federal agency decisions, searchable in plain English.
Workplace-safety cases from the Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission (OSHRC) and mine-safety cases from the Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission (FMSHRC), each with a plain-English summary, the standards it cites, and whether it counts as precedent. More agencies are coming.
No decisions match these filters
Try a different search term or clear the filters.
Secretary of Labor v. Blanchard Machinery Co.
Secretary of Labor v. Blanchard Machinery Co. (FMSHRC SE 2024-0113): Unknown recipient justified reopening
Blanchard Machinery sought to reopen a penalty assessment that it said it never received. The assessment was addressed to an employee with no mining or safety duties and signed for by a person whom neither Blanchard nor its carrier employed at the time. Blanchard investigated promptly after…
Secretary of Labor v. Blanchard Machinery Co.
Secretary of Labor v. Blanchard Machinery Co. (FMSHRC SE 2024-0113): Unknown recipient supported reopening
Blanchard Machinery sought to reopen a penalty assessment that it said it never received. The assessment was addressed to an employee with no mining or safety duties and signed for by a person whom neither Blanchard nor its carrier employed at the time. Blanchard investigated promptly after…
Secretary of Labor v. Tata Chemicals Soda Ash Partners, LLC
Secretary of Labor v. Tata Chemicals Soda Ash Partners, LLC (FMSHRC WEST 2024-0151): Due-date mistake supported reopening
Tata Chemicals retrieved a proposed assessment from its post office four days after delivery and calculated the contest deadline from the pickup date. Its contest of the unpaid penalties was five days late under the actual delivery date. Tata supplemented its reopening motion to explain the…
Secretary of Labor v. St. Mary's Cement
Secretary of Labor v. St. Marys Cement U.S. LLC (FMSHRC LAKE 2025-0084): Timely all-penalties contest required remand
St. Marys timely returned a proposed-assessment form and checked the box stating that it contested every listed violation. It did not also check the individual boxes beside several penalties, and MSHA later issued a delinquency notice for those items. The Commission held that the assessment never…
Secretary of Labor v. St. Mary's Cement
Secretary of Labor v. St. Marys Cement (FMSHRC LAKE 2023-0265): Paid settlement made reopening moot
MSHA proposed $85,461 in penalties, and St. Marys timely contested them before agreeing to a settlement that reduced the amount to $67,025. The operator paid the full settlement amount after receiving a delinquency notice. St. Marys nevertheless moved to reopen, but it identified no mistake or…
Secretary of Labor v. JDI Industrial
Secretary of Labor v. JDI Industrial (FMSHRC SE 2024-0109): Refused assessment and legal mistake defeated reopening
JDI Industrial sought to reopen five recordkeeping penalties after delivery of the proposed assessment was refused and the contest deadline passed. Its safety director had worked with MSHA to correct the violations and mistakenly believed that abatement meant no penalties would be issued. The…
Secretary of Labor v. Road & Rail Services
Secretary of Labor v. Road & Rail Services (FMSHRC SE 2024-0064): Prompt action supported reopening
Road & Rail missed a penalty contest deadline after several problems converged, including a missing copy of the citation, illness of its safety director, difficulty interviewing involved people, and the Thanksgiving holiday. The Secretary did not oppose reopening but urged the operator to prevent…
Secretary of Labor v. Georgetown Sand & Gravel, Inc.
Secretary of Labor v. Georgetown Sand & Gravel, Inc. (FMSHRC PENN 2024-0020): Unreliable processing defeated reopening
Georgetown Sand filed its penalty contest after the 30-day deadline and blamed an oversight and a communication breakdown between its president and office manager. The Secretary opposed reopening because the explanation lacked details and the operator had recently filed another reopening motion…
Secretary of Labor v. St. Mary's Cement
Secretary of Labor v. St. Marys Cement (FMSHRC LAKE 2024-0086): Repeated processing failures defeated reopening
St. Marys missed a penalty contest deadline because its plant manager emailed the assessment to general counsel but omitted outside counsel. The operator attributed the mistake to safety-department turnover and explained that its general counsel, who was distracted by a family death, did not notice…
Secretary of Labor v. AA Quarry, LLC
Secretary of Labor v. AA Quarry, LLC (FMSHRC CENT 2024-0093): Misdirected contest form supported reopening
AA Quarry intended to contest one of ten citations and pay the other nine, but it mailed the contest form with its payment to the wrong MSHA location. The Secretary confirmed the timely payment and did not oppose reopening the contested citation. The Commission found that the misdirected form was…
Secretary of Labor v. Belt Tech., Inc.
Secretary of Labor v. Belt Tech., Inc. (FMSHRC WEVA 2024-0036): Nonreceipt prevented the assessment from becoming final
MSHA mailed a proposed assessment to Belt Tech's correct address, but the Postal Service returned it to MSHA 13 minutes after receiving it. Belt Tech never received the assessment and later contacted MSHA about the penalties. The Commission held that the 30-day contest period never began, so the…
Secretary of Labor v. Explosive Contractors, Inc.
Secretary of Labor v. Explosive Contractors, Inc. (FMSHRC CENT 2024-0122): Persistent conference efforts supported reopening
Explosive Contractors missed its penalty contest deadline while waiting for MSHA to act on a conference request it had pursued by phone and email for months. The operator promptly sought a formal hearing and reopening after learning that the conference request had been denied, and the Secretary did…
Secretary of Labor v. Tintic Consolidated Metals, LLC
Secretary of Labor v. Tintic Consolidated Metals, LLC (FMSHRC WEST 2024-0067): Misdirected timely contest excused
MSHA proposed $67,007 in penalties against Tintic, and the assessment became final after MSHA did not receive a timely contest. Tintic had filed a contest within 30 days, but mistakenly sent it to the Commission instead of MSHA's Civil Penalty Compliance Office. The Commission majority treated that…
Secretary of Labor v. Lo Down Energy, Inc.
Secretary of Labor v. Lo Down Energy, Inc. (FMSHRC WEVA 2024-0147): Repeated mail failures did not justify reopening
Lo Down Energy sought to reopen a final penalty assessment after a mailed copy intended for its representative was not received before the contest deadline. The operator did not confirm delivery and then failed to respond to its representative for a week after the problem was discovered. The…
Secretary of Labor v. Coyote Gravel Products, Inc.
Secretary of Labor v. Coyote Gravel Products, Inc. (FMSHRC CENT 2024-0139): Conclusory internal-error claim rejected
Coyote Gravel sought to reopen a final penalty assessment, saying its general manager neglected to submit completed contest paperwork because of an internal error. The Commission held that a reopening request must give a detailed explanation of the failure, including relevant dates, people, causes…
Secretary of Labor v. Patton Mining, LLC
Secretary of Labor v. Patton Mining, LLC (FMSHRC LAKE 2024-0004): Isolated failure to return contest form excused
Patton decided to contest four of nineteen violations and promptly paid the penalties for the other fifteen. Its service provider's safety director mistakenly failed to return the contest form to MSHA. Patton discovered the omission after receiving a delinquency notice, investigated immediately…
Secretary of Labor v. Muhlenberg County Coal Resources, Inc.
Secretary of Labor v. Muhlenberg County Coal Resources, Inc. (FMSHRC KENT 2023-0084): Ignored certified-mail notices barred reopening
Muhlenberg claimed that a proposed assessment was misdelivered because no authorized recipient was available when certified mail arrived. Postal records showed that notices were left at the company's address twice. The Commission held that this was not a postal mistake because the assessment was…
Secretary of Labor v. Active Resources, Inc.
Secretary of Labor v. Active Resources, Inc. (FMSHRC WEVA 2024-0035): Intentional payment based on legal misunderstanding barred reopening
Active Resources intentionally paid a citation while rehabilitating a nonproducing mine because it believed payment meant the citation had been abated. MSHA later issued a section 104(b) order for failure to abate, prompting Active to argue that it would have contested the assessment if it had…
Secretary of Labor v. Garcia Mining Company, LLC
Secretary of Labor v. Garcia Mining Company, LLC (FMSHRC SE 2024-0023): Timely emailed contest made assessment nonfinal
Garcia emailed its penalty contest to MSHA's Civil Penalty Office two days after receiving the proposed assessment. MSHA did not docket the contest, and Garcia later received a delinquency notice. The company supplied email evidence of its timely filing and sought reopening after MSHA directed it…
Secretary of Labor v. Georgetown Sand & Gravel, Inc.
Secretary of Labor v. Georgetown Sand & Gravel, Inc. (FMSHRC PENN 2024-0008): Reopening explanation deemed incomplete
A proposed assessment reached Georgetown's post office box on a Saturday, and the company retrieved it the following Monday. Georgetown filed its contest 30 days after retrieval, but MSHA treated the assessment as final based on the Saturday delivery date. The Commission majority held that the…
Secretary of Labor v. Cooper Stone, LLC
Secretary of Labor v. Cooper Stone, LLC (FMSHRC CENT 2024-0017): Uncorrected mail system barred reopening
Cooper Stone said it did not receive a proposed assessment because its mine office was in a high-crime area with mail problems. The company had identified those problems and proposed changing its address in 2021, but had not corrected the address when the assessment was delivered in 2023. Postal…
Secretary of Labor v. ASGCO Manufacturing, Inc.
Secretary of Labor v. ASGCO Manufacturing, Inc. (FMSHRC PENN 2024-0007): Paid penalty triggered show-cause order
ASGCO asked the Commission to reopen a final assessment involving one citation. The Secretary did not oppose reopening but reported that MSHA had received full payment of the penalty after the motion was filed. Because payment appeared to eliminate the dispute, the Commission did not decide the…
Secretary of Labor v. Ram Enterprises, Inc.
Secretary of Labor v. Ram Enterprises, Inc. (FMSHRC WEST 2023-0351): Timely contest made assessment nonfinal
Ram Enterprise sought to reopen three citations after receiving a delinquency notice for an assessment it believed was already in contest. The company contacted MSHA about the pending hearing and later moved to reopen. The Secretary confirmed that Ram Enterprise had timely contested the proposed…
Secretary of Labor v. TIC - The Industrial Company
Secretary of Labor v. TIC - The Industrial Company (FMSHRC WEST 2023-0405): Assessment sent to old address held nonfinal
TIC updated its address of record with MSHA before the proposed assessment was issued. The change was not properly entered in MSHA's system, so the assessment was sent to the old address and returned as undeliverable. TIC discovered the delinquent penalty through MSHA's data system and requested a…
Secretary of Labor v. Robinson Nevada Mining Company
Secretary of Labor v. Robinson Nevada Mining Company (FMSHRC WEST 2023-0382): Unknown recipient signature justified reopening
Robinson Nevada said it never received a proposed assessment that postal records showed was signed for by “C SMITH” in Ely, Nevada. The company had no employee by that name and learned of the assessment only after receiving a delinquency notice. It contacted MSHA the next day and promptly sought…
Secretary of Labor v. Specialty Vermiculite, LLC
Secretary of Labor v. Specialty Vermiculite, LLC (FMSHRC SE 2023-0232): Corrected delivery date confirmed timely contest
Specialty Vermiculite contested four citations on August 4, 2023. MSHA initially treated the filing as late because postal information listed the assessment as delivered on July 1. After reviewing the delivery record, MSHA corrected the receipt date to July 5, making the contest timely. The…
Secretary of Labor v. Crimson Oak Grove Resources, LLC and Secretary of Labor v. River City Stone-DIV/Mathy Construction Co. and Secretary of Labor v. Holcim (US) Inc. and Secretary of Labor v. Greenbrier Minerals, LLC
Secretary of Labor v. Crimson Oak Grove Resources, LLC and consolidated cases (FMSHRC LAKE 2021-0145): Settlement citation vacaturs required Commission review
These five cases involved proposed settlements or dismissals in which the Secretary would vacate citations while operators accepted or withdrew contests to other citations and waived potential attorney-fee claims. The ALJ required either assurance that the vacaturs were independent of the other…
Secretary of Labor v. Tintic Consolidated Metals, LLC
Secretary of Labor v. Tintic Consolidated Metals, LLC (FMSHRC WEST 2023-0406): Personnel-change explanation deemed too cursory
Tintic missed the contest deadline for an $83,040 assessment while its chief operating officer was retiring, its safety superintendent changed positions, and a new general manager was appointed. The company discovered the delinquency when the new manager received a later assessment and promptly…
Secretary of Labor v. Mid-States Materials, LLC
Secretary of Labor v. Mid-States Materials, LLC (FMSHRC CENT 2023-0250): Unexplained delays barred reopening with prejudice
Mid-States paid three penalties and emailed MSHA to contest seven others, but the email was sent 28 days after the assessment had already become final. The company did not explain why the contest was late. It also filed its reopening motion more than a month after the delinquency notice without…
Secretary of Labor v. GCC Dacotah, Inc.
Secretary of Labor v. GCC Dacotah, Inc. (FMSHRC CENT 2023-0229): Repeated email-address errors barred reopening
GCC Dacotah failed to file two penalty contests because employees typed MSHA's contest email address incorrectly. The same mistake had already caused another missed contest, after which the company said it circulated a preventive memorandum. The Commission found that GCC Dacotah made the same error…
Secretary of Labor v. CalPortland
Secretary of Labor v. CalPortland (FMSHRC WEST 2023-0240): Business-day deadline mistake excused
CalPortland misread the 30-day contest deadline as 30 business days. It filed its reopening motion on the thirtieth business day after receiving the assessment, which was 12 days after the assessment became final. The Commission found that timing consistent with the company's explanation and that…
Secretary of Labor v. C&C Leasing & Excavating, Inc.
Secretary of Labor v. C&C Leasing & Excavating, Inc. (FMSHRC WEVA 2023-0536): Owner's hospitalization justified reopening
C&C's owner normally sent proposed assessments to a safety consultant for review. While the owner was repeatedly hospitalized because of illness, he failed to forward this assessment and the contest deadline passed. The company responded by designating another employee to handle assessments during…
Secretary of Labor v. Morton Salt, Inc.
Secretary of Labor v. Morton Salt, Inc. (FMSHRC CENT 2023-0072): Final penalties mooted order contests
Morton Salt timely contested four MSHA orders but did not separately contest the later proposed penalties tied to those orders. The penalties became final, and the Commission denied with prejudice a separate motion to reopen them. Morton Salt did not appeal that denial or respond to a later…
Secretary of Labor v. Peabody Twentymile Mining, LLC
Secretary of Labor v. Peabody Twentymile Mining, LLC (FMSHRC WEST 2023-0363): Disability and untrained handoff excused
Peabody's safety manager, who normally processed assessments, was unexpectedly absent on short-term disability. The assessment went to an employee taking over compliance duties who had not been told that processing it was his responsibility and had not been trained. Peabody discovered the final…
Secretary of Labor v. Brand Industrial Services, LLC
Secretary of Labor v. Brand Industrial Services, LLC (FMSHRC LAKE 2024-0155): Five-day late contest excused
A Brand employee mistakenly routed the proposed assessment to the wrong department. Brand attempted to contest the assessment five days after the deadline and then promptly filed a reopening motion. The Secretary opposed relief and argued that the company had unreliable procedures. The Commission…
Secretary of Labor v. Taishan Coal, LLC
Secretary of Labor v. Taishan Coal, LLC (FMSHRC WEVA 2023-0553): Vague process failures and unexplained delays barred reopening
Taishan Coal asked the Commission to reopen three final penalty assessments covering 18 citations and orders with proposed penalties totaling $78,622. The company said it failed to forward the assessments to its third-party safety consultant and that there were miscommunications about which…
Secretary of Labor v. Lopke Quarries, Inc.
Secretary of Labor v. Lopke Quarries, Inc. (FMSHRC SE 2023-0254): Misdirected filings and delay barred reopening
Lopke Quarries said it mailed contest forms with penalty payments to MSHA's payment center and later mistakenly sent its first reopening request to MSHA instead of the Commission. The company received delinquency notices in April and May and a scofflaw letter in July, but did not contact MSHA until…
Secretary of Labor v. Ramaco Resources, LLC
Secretary of Labor v. Ramaco Resources, LLC (FMSHRC WEVA 2023-0479): Unknown staff-turnover error did not justify reopening
Ramaco Resources sought to reopen 11 citations after a proposed assessment did not reach its vice president of safety for a timely contest. The company pointed to employee turnover, said it could not identify the specific error, and reported that it later trained new employees. The Commission…
Secretary of Labor v. Dyno Nobel
Secretary of Labor v. Dyno Nobel (FMSHRC SE 2023-0127): Prompt self-check excused a one-time address lapse
Dyno Nobel did not receive a proposed assessment because it had moved without updating its address of record with MSHA or the Postal Service. The contractor had already contested the underlying citation, later checked why no assessment had arrived, and moved to reopen less than two weeks after…
Secretary of Labor v. R.J. Valente Gravel, Inc.
Secretary of Labor v. R.J. Valente Gravel, Inc. (FMSHRC YORK 2023-0115): Prior contest and prompt follow-up supported reopening
R.J. Valente Gravel failed to forward a proposed assessment to counsel, who discovered it while checking the status of a related citation contest. The prior contest showed that the operator intended to challenge the citation, and it moved to reopen within 30 days after learning of the assessment…
Secretary of Labor v. Holcim-WCR, Inc.
Secretary of Labor v. Holcim-WCR, Inc. (FMSHRC WEST 2023-0313): Proactive assessment check supported reopening
Holcim-WCR missed the contest deadline because a proposed assessment was not routed to its regional health and safety manager. The manager found the assessment by checking MSHA's data system seven days after it became final, and Holcim immediately began seeking reopening before MSHA sent any…
Secretary of Labor v. J.R. Vinagro Corporation
Secretary of Labor v. J.R. Vinagro Corporation (FMSHRC YORK 2023-0064): New tracking controls supported reopening
A proposed assessment for one of nine citations issued during a fatality investigation was placed with other investigation papers instead of being sent to J.R. Vinagro's new safety director. The director learned in late February that this and two other assessment forms were delinquent. Vinagro…
Secretary of Labor v. Pocahontas Coal Company, LLC
Secretary of Labor v. Pocahontas Coal Company, LLC (FMSHRC WEVA 2023-0351): Bare error claim and unexplained delay barred reopening
Pocahontas Coal said an administrative error delayed delivery of a proposed assessment to outside counsel. It did not identify the error, the people involved, or when its safety manager learned that the contest deadline had been missed. The company also filed more than two months after MSHA mailed…
Secretary of Labor v. Ramaco Resources, LLC
Secretary of Labor v. Ramaco Resources, LLC (FMSHRC WEVA 2023-0336): Email failure and collection-stage delay barred reopening
Ramaco Resources said an email-system malfunction prevented its vice president of safety from receiving a scanned assessment. MSHA sent a delinquency notice in February and hand-delivered a scofflaw letter in March concerning unpaid penalties, but Ramaco did not move to reopen until May. The…
Secretary of Labor v. Alleyton Resource Company, LLC
Secretary of Labor v. Alleyton Resource Company, LLC (FMSHRC CENT 2024-0206): Timely citation contest and proactive check supported reopening
Alleyton Resource timely contested a citation, but administrative staff later sent the related assessment for payment without realizing the citation was disputed. Counsel found the mistaken payment while proactively reviewing MSHA's data system and moved to reopen within 30 days after the…
Secretary of Labor v. Giant Cement Company
Secretary of Labor v. Giant Cement Company (FMSHRC SE 2024-0022): One timely contest dismissed, one misaddressed contest reopened
Giant Cement sought relief in two assessment matters with different filing problems. In SE 2024-0022, the company had timely filed two contest notices, but their separate processing confused MSHA's system and produced an erroneous delinquency notice. The Commission dismissed that reopening motion…
Secretary of Labor v. Westfall Aggregate & Materials, Inc.
Secretary of Labor v. Westfall Aggregate & Materials, Inc. (FMSHRC LAKE 2019-0317): Eight-year delay exceeded the reopening limit
Westfall Aggregate received a $16,400 proposed assessment in July 2011, missed the contest deadline, and did not seek reopening until July 2019. The Commission had previously treated the request as moot because it believed the assessment never became final. The D.C. Circuit reversed that conclusion…
Secretary of Labor v. Morton Salt, Inc.
Secretary of Labor v. Morton Salt, Inc. (FMSHRC CENT 2023-0248): Repeated process failures and long delay barred reopening
Morton Salt sought to reopen five orders after a new environmental, health, and safety manager failed to contest the associated penalties. The company had timely contested four underlying orders, but it did not identify concrete corrective steps for the penalty-processing failure. The Commission…
Secretary of Labor v. Chad Buus, employed by United States Steel - Minnesota Ore Operations
Secretary of Labor v. Chad Buus (FMSHRC LAKE 2024-0016): Timely emailed contest prevented finality
Chad Buus timely emailed a contest of an individual penalty assessment to MSHA. The agency received the filing but did not assign or process it, causing the assessment to appear final. After the error was identified, MSHA processed the contest and agreed that reopening was moot. The Commission held…
Secretary of Labor v. Leesville Land, LLC
Secretary of Labor v. Leesville Land, LLC (FMSHRC LAKE 2024-0051): One assessment time-barred, nine reopened after staffing change
Leesville Land sought to reopen ten assessments missed by a former safety director who had limited contest experience and did not understand the assessment process. After MSHA warned that the mine's enforcement history was trending toward pattern-of-violations consideration, Leesville hired an…
Secretary of Labor v. ITAC
Secretary of Labor v. ITAC (FMSHRC SE 2023-0197): Prompt recovery of mail excused stale address
ITAC moved in 2009 without updating its MSHA address, and a 2023 assessment was delivered to the former location and signed for by an unidentified recipient. An employee looking for missing packages recovered the assessment on May 25, and ITAC contacted MSHA on the next business day and moved to…
Secretary of Labor v. United Taconite, LLC
Secretary of Labor v. United Taconite, LLC (FMSHRC LAKE 2023-0205): Untrained handoff and counsel delay barred reopening
Staffing changes left a new United Taconite safety specialist with a proposed assessment but no instructions for handling it. The company did not train the specialist on the assessment process for more than two months. After an April delinquency notice, United Taconite contacted outside counsel…
Secretary of Labor v. Morton Salt, Inc.
Secretary of Labor v. Morton Salt, Inc. (FMSHRC CENT 2023-0218): Unsent contest and repeated process failures barred reopening
Morton Salt's environmental, health, and safety manager marked four citations for contest but did not mail or email the completed assessment form. MSHA had already told the company that the citations were no longer eligible for a conference and that it needed to return the assessment form to…
Secretary of Labor v. Panther Creek Mining, LLC
Secretary of Labor v. Panther Creek Mining, LLC (FMSHRC WEVA 2023-0297): Undetailed routing error barred reopening
Panther Creek missed the contest deadline for 49 citations carrying $75,601 in proposed penalties. It said only that an administrative error delayed routing the assessment to its corporate safety director, without identifying dates or describing the failure. The Commission majority also noted an…
Secretary of Labor v. Select Materials
Secretary of Labor v. Select Materials (FMSHRC LAKE 2023-0148): Uncollected certified mail barred reopening
Select Materials said it never received a proposed assessment and first learned of the penalties when MSHA hand-delivered a collection letter. Postal records showed that certified delivery had been attempted at the operator's correct Ohio address and that multiple notices went uncollected before…
Secretary of Labor v. St. Marys Cement
Secretary of Labor v. St. Marys Cement (FMSHRC LAKE 2023-0116): Proactive data review supported reopening
St. Marys Cement received a proposed assessment shortly before Christmas while personnel were absent and safety leadership was changing. The company also mistakenly believed the citation had been contested through a different assessment. It discovered the error while proactively reviewing MSHA's…
Secretary of Labor v. Heidelberg Materials US Cement, LLC
Secretary of Labor v. Heidelberg Materials US Cement, LLC (FMSHRC CENT 2023-0192): Omitted scan page supported reopening
Heidelberg Materials timely contested five penalties but unintentionally omitted the assessment's fourth page when scanning the contest form. Three citations on that page were therefore not included. After the Secretary filed a petition on the timely contests, Heidelberg reviewed the filing…
Secretary of Labor v. Entact
Secretary of Labor v. Entact (FMSHRC WEST 2023-0117): Returned assessment never became final
MSHA mailed Entact's proposed assessment to a former Pennsylvania address, and Postal Service records showed it was returned because the occupant had moved. Entact's current safety director and address of record were in Illinois, and the company found no copy of the assessment in its offices or…
Secretary of Labor v. Dyno Nobel
Secretary of Labor v. Dyno Nobel (FMSHRC SE 2023-0081): Holiday staffing and citation confusion excused delay
Dyno Nobel received a proposed assessment during the holiday period while personnel were absent and offices were closed. The assessment was not forwarded to counsel, and staff also confused the citation with a related citation issued on the same date. The company discovered the final order by…
Secretary of Labor v. GCC Dacotah, Inc.
Secretary of Labor v. GCC Dacotah, Inc. (FMSHRC CENT 2023-0173): Email-address typo treated as a unique mistake
GCC Dacotah attempted to email its contest on time, but a typo in MSHA's address prevented delivery and the company's system produced no error notice. After learning of the problem, it moved to reopen within 30 days and circulated a memorandum to safety personnel. The Commission majority…
What these documents are
- Commission decisions: Rulings by the Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission itself, the highest level of agency review. These are citable as Commission precedent, though a decision may have been appealed to a U.S. Court of Appeals after issuance.
- ALJ decisions: Rulings by OSHRC Administrative Law Judges after a hearing. When no Commissioner directs review, an ALJ decision becomes a final order under 29 U.S.C. § 661(j): it binds the parties in that case but is not binding precedent in other cases.
- Why finality matters: Every page here says which kind of decision you are reading, so you know whether it is precedent you can cite or a final order that only shows how one judge ruled on one set of facts.
- Where they come from: Every page links the official OSHRC public release, and the full text on the page is that release. The plain-English summaries are written by Ezel.