🧪 TEST MODE ACTIVE Use test card: 4242 4242 4242 4242
FMSHRC Commission decision Docket WEVA 2020-0270 Decided January 5, 2021 Procedural

Secretary of Labor v. U.S. Silica

Secretary of Labor v. U.S. Silica (FMSHRC WEVA 2020-0270): Reopening request dismissed after counsel declined to proceed

Apply this precedent to your situation

This is citable Commission precedent from 2021, and it may have been appealed since. Ezel checks how it stands today and answers your situation, with citations.

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

The Commission had ordered U.S. Silica to explain why its motion to reopen should not be denied because of an unexplained filing delay. The next day, company counsel stated that the operator did not intend to file anything further and would allow the show-cause order to become final. The Commission therefore denied the reopening motion. It dismissed the matter with prejudice.

Decision snapshot

  • Cited authority: 30 U.S.C. § 813(a)
  • Outcome: The motion to reopen was denied and the docket was dismissed with prejudice.
  • Key point: An operator that declines to answer a show-cause order cannot continue pursuing reopening.

Full text (FMSHRC public release)

FEDERAL MINE SAFETY
AND HEALTH REVIEW COMMISSION

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

WASHINGTON,
DC 20004-1710

SECRETARY OF LABOR,

MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH       

ADMINISTRATION (MSHA)          

v.

U.S. SILICA

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

Docket No. WEVA 2020-0270

A.C. No. 46-02805-499009

BEFORE: Rajkovich, Chairman; Althen and Traynor,
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. (2012) (“Mine Act”). The
Commission has received a motion from the operator seeking to reopen a penalty
assessment which had become a final order of the Commission pursuant to section
105(a) of the Mine Act, 30 U.S.C. § 813(a). On December 14, 2020, the
Commission issued an order to show cause within 20 days why the Commission
should not deny the motion to reopen and dismiss the docket for an unexplained
delay in filing the motion.

On December 15, 2020, the Commission received an
email from counsel for the operator stating that it did not intend to file a
further motion and would allow the Commission’s December 14 order to become
final. Consistent with that order, the motion to reopen has been denied and
this matter is dismissed with prejudice.

/s/ Marco M. Rajkovich,
Jr.

Marco
M. Rajkovich, Jr., Chairman

/s/
William I. Althen

William I.
Althen, Commissioner

/s/ Arthur R.
Traynor, III

Arthur R.
Traynor, III, Commissioner

Distribution (email)

Michael Peelish

Attorney for U.S. Silica

Law Firm of Adele L. Abrams, PLLC

[email protected]

John M. McCracken

Senior Trial Attorney

Office of the Solicitor

Mine Safety and Health Division

U.S. Department of Labor

[email protected]

Chief Administrative Law Judge
Glenn Voisin

Federal Mine Safety & Health
Review Commission

[email protected]

Melanie Garris

Office of Civil Penalty
Compliance

Mine Safety and Health
Administration

[email protected]

Get today's answer for your situation

You just read Commission precedent from 2021. 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.