🧪 TEST MODE ACTIVE Use test card: 4242 4242 4242 4242
FMSHRC ALJ decision Docket SE 2020-0213, SE 2020-0232 Decided July 14, 2021 Settled Judge Thomas P. McCarthy

Secretary of Labor v. Warrior Met Coal Mining, LLC

Secretary of Labor v. Warrior Met Coal Mining, LLC (FMSHRC SE 2020-0213): Twenty-one-citation settlement approved

Apply this to your situation

This order from 2021 bound only the parties to this case; it isn't precedent. Ezel answers your situation under the current MSHA standards and Commission precedent, with citations.

Final order, not Commission precedent
This decision by a FMSHRC Administrative Law Judge became the final decision of the Commission 40 days after issuance because the Commission did not direct review (30 U.S.C. § 823(d)(1)). It binds the parties but is not binding on the Commission in other cases. 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

Warrior Met Coal Mining and the Secretary proposed resolving two penalty cases by reducing total penalties from $61,707 to $33,035. Nine citations remained unchanged, while twelve were modified on injury likelihood, number of persons affected, injury severity, or negligence. Judge Thomas P. McCarthy rejected the Secretary's argument that use of the Part 100 penalty tables created a presumptively reasonable settlement because the Commission exercises independent penalty authority. He nevertheless found the agreement fair, reasonable, appropriate under the facts, and protective of the public interest after independently considering the record and statutory criteria. The settlement was approved and Warrior Met was ordered to pay $33,035 within 30 days.

Decision snapshot

  • Cited authority: 30 C.F.R. § 100.3; 30 U.S.C. §§ 815(d) and 820(i)
  • Outcome: Twelve citations were modified, nine remained unchanged, and the total settled penalty was $33,035.
  • Key point: Use of MSHA's penalty tables did not itself establish reasonableness, but the settlement passed independent review under the statutory criteria.

Full text (FMSHRC public release)

FEDERAL MINE
SAFETY AND HEALTH REVIEW COMMISSION

OFFICE
OF ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGES

1331
PENNSYLVANIA AVE., N.W., SUITE 520N

WASHINGTON,
DC 20004-1710

TELEPHONE:
202-434-9900 / FAX: 202-434-9949

SECRETARY OF
LABOR

MINE SAFETY
AND HEALTH       

ADMINISTRATION
(MSHA),

Petitioner

v.

WARRIOR MET COAL
MINING, LLC,

Respondent

CIVIL PENALTY
PROCEEDINGS

Docket No. SE
2020-0213

A.C. No. 01-01401-516467

Docket No. SE
2020-0232

A.C. No. 01-01401-518427

Mine: No. 7 Mine

DECISION
APPROVING SETTLEMENT

ORDER
TO MODIFY

ORDER
TO PAY

Before: Judge McCarthy

This
case is before the undersigned upon Petitions for the Assessment of Civil
Penalty under section 105(d) of the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977,
30 U.S.C. § 815(d). The Solicitor has
filed a motion to approve settlement proposing a reduction in the penalties
from $61,707.00 to $33,035.00. Citations No. 9493251, 9493254, 9493165,
9493261, 9493263, 9493249, 9493250, 9493164, and 9493167 remain unchanged, but
the Solicitor justifies the reductions in penalties by stating there are legitimate
factual and legal disputes regarding gravity and negligence. The Solicitor also
requests that

Citation No. 9493255 be modified to reduce the number
of persons affected from two to one;

Citations No. 9493257 and 9493256 be modified to
reduce the likelihoods of injury or illness from highly likely to reasonably
likely and the numbers of persons affected from two to one;

Citation No. 9493166 be modified to reduce the level
of negligence from high to moderate;

Citations No. 9133601, 9493273, 9264049, 9264050, and
9493308 be modified to reduce the levels of negligence from moderate to low;

Citations No. 9493031 and 9493032 be modified to
reduce the expected injuries or illnesses from fatal to permanently disabling; and

Citation No. 9230950 be modified to reduce the level
of negligence from high to low. [1]

The
Secretary also argues that “

[t]he Secretary’s use of [the 30
C.F.R. § 100.3] regular assessment tables in settlement is a  prima   facie  indication
that the penalty reduction is fair, reasonable, and adequate under the facts,
and protects the public interest. It is appropriate to defer to the judgment of
the parties[] in arriving at a modified penalty based on the § 100.3
tables.

Settlement
Mot. at 9 (citing Vindex Energy Corp. , 34 FMSHRC 223, 224 (Jan.
2012) (ALJ)). However, not only is the Commission not bound by 30 C.F.R. §
100.3, but it is the purview of the Commission—not the Secretary or regulations
issued by the Secretary—to determine whether a settlement is appropriate under
the criteria set forth in section 110(i) of the Act . Sellersburg
Stone Co. v. FMSHRC , 736 F. 2d 1147, 1151-52
(7th Cir. 1984) (“[N]either the ALJ nor the Commission is bound by the
Secretary’s proposed penalties. . . . [W]e find no basis upon
which to conclude that these MSHA [penalty] regulations also govern the
Commission.”);  Hidden Splendor Res., Inc. , 36 FMSHRC 3099, 3101
(Dec. 2014) (“The Secretary’s regulations at 30 C.F.R. Part 100 apply only to
the Secretary’s penalty proposals, while the Commission exercises independent
“authority to assess all civil penalties provided [under the Act]’ by applying
the six criteria set forth in section 110(i).” (quoting 30 U.S.C. § 820(i))).

In
order to overcome this burden, the Secretary must present evidence to a judge—exercising
his or her independent authority—to satisfy the six criteria set forth in
section 110(i). Simply pointing to the Secretary’s regulations does not
overcome this burden. Therefore, the undersigned rejects the Solicitor’s
contention that the application of section 100.3 establishes a  prima   facie  case
for a reasonable settlement.

Consequently,
the undersigned evaluated the settlement agreement absent the argument rejected
above.

The
undersigned considered the representations and documentation submitted in this
case, and the undersigned concludes that the proffered settlement is fair,
reasonable, appropriate under the facts, and protects the public interest under
The American Coal Co. , 38 FMSHRC 1972, 1976 (Aug. 2016), and is
appropriate under the criteria set forth in section 110(i) of the Act. The
settlement amounts are as follows:

WHEREFORE ,
the motion for approval of settlement is GRANTED .

It is ORDERED
that Citation No. 9493255 be MODIFIED to reduce the number of
persons affected from two to one.

It is ORDERED
that Citations No. 9493257 and 9493256 be MODIFIED to reduce the likelihoods
of injury or illness from highly likely to reasonably likely and the numbers of
persons affected from two to one.

It is ORDERED
that Citation No. 9493166 be MODIFIED to reduce the level of
negligence from high to moderate.

It is ORDERED
that Citations No. 9133601, 9493273, 9264049, 9264050, and 9493308 be MODIFIED
to reduce the levels of negligence from moderate to low.

It is ORDERED
that Citations No. 9493031 and 9493032 be MODIFIED to reduce the
expected injuries or illnesses from fatal to permanently disabling.

It is ORDERED
that Citation No. 9230950 be MODIFIED to reduce the level of
negligence from high to low.

It
is further ORDERED that the operator pay a total penalty of $33,035.00
within thirty days of this order. [2]

/s/
Thomas P. McCarthy

Thomas
P. McCarthy

Administrative
Law Judge

Distribution:

Jean C. Abreu

C. Renita Hollins

Office of the
Solicitor

U.S. Department of
Labor

61 Forsyth Street,
S.W.

Room 7T10

Atlanta, GA 30303

[email protected]

[email protected]

[email protected]

Guy W. Hensley

Warrior Met Coal
Mining, LLC

16243 Highway 216

Brookwood, AL
35444

[email protected]

/ztb

[1] Although there
were some clerical errors in the Settlement Motion, the Secretary clarified the
proposed settlement in an email dated July 13, 2021. This Decision reflects
those clarifications.

[2] Payment should be
sent to: Pay.gov, a service of the U.S. Department of the Treasury, at https://www.pay.gov/public/form/start/67564508 or, alternately,
Mine Safety & Health Administration, U.S. Department of Labor, Payment
Office, P.O. Box 790390, St. Louis, MO 63179-0390.

Get today's answer for your situation

You just read what one judge decided for one employer in 2021, 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.