Secretary of Labor v. Coal-Mac, LLC
Secretary of Labor v. Coal-Mac, LLC (FMSHRC WEVA 2021-0025-M): Existing-litigation mistake supported reopening
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.
Plain-English summary
Coal-Mac had unsuccessfully conferenced and timely contested the underlying citation. When the proposed penalty assessment arrived, the operator believed the matter was already in litigation and did not file a separate penalty contest. The Secretary did not oppose reopening but urged better procedures for future assessments. The Commission found mistake, inadvertence, and excusable neglect, reopened the assessment, and remanded it for further proceedings.
Decision snapshot
- Cited authority: 30 U.S.C. § 815(a); 30 C.F.R. § 2700.1(b)
- Outcome: The final assessment was reopened and the matter was remanded.
- Key point: A mistaken belief that a timely citation contest already placed the penalty assessment in litigation supported 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.
COAL-MAC, LLC
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
WEVA 2021-0025-M
A.C. No. 46-08984-516627
BEFORE: Traynor, Chair; Althen and Rajkovich, 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”). On November 12, 2020, the Commission received from
Coal-Mac, LLC (“Coal-Mac”) a motion
seeking to reopen a penalty assessment that appeared to have become a final
order of the Commission pursuant to section 105(a) of the Mine Act, 30 U.S.C. §
815(a).
Under section 105(a)
of the Mine Act, an operator who wishes to contest a proposed penalty must
notify the Secretary of Labor no later than 30 days after receiving the
proposed penalty assessment. If the operator fails to notify the Secretary, the
proposed penalty assessment is deemed a final order of the Commission. 30
U.S.C. § 815(a).
We have held,
however, that in appropriate circumstances, we possess
jurisdiction to reopen uncontested assessments that have become final
Commission orders under section 105(a). Jim Walter Res., Inc., 15 FMSHRC
782, 786-89 (May 1993) (“ JWR ”). 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 the Commission may relieve a party from a final
order of the Commission on the basis of mistake, inadvertence, excusable
neglect, or other reason justifying relief. 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”); JWR , 15 FMSHRC at 787. 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).
Records of the
Department of Labor’s Mine Safety and Health Administration (“MSHA”) indicate
that the proposed assessment was delivered on June 25, 2020, and became a final
order on July 27. The operator had conferenced the underlying citation
unsuccessfully, and timely contested the citation. The motion states that when
the operator received the proposed assessment, it believed the matter was
already in litigation. The Secretary does not oppose the requests to reopen,
but urges the operator to take steps to ensure that future penalty contests are
timely filed.
Having reviewed Coal-Mac’s request and the Secretary’s response, we
find that the operator has sufficiently explained its failure to timely contest
the citations at issue as the result of mistake, inadvertence, and excusable
neglect. In the interest of justice, we hereby reopen
this matter and remand it 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/ Arthur R.
Traynor, III
Arthur
R. Traynor, III, Chair
/s/
William I. Althen
William
I. Althen, Commissioner
/s/
Marco M. Rajkovich, Jr.
Marco M.
Rajkovich, Jr., Commissioner
Distribution (by e-mail):
Mark E. Heath, Esq.
Spilman, Thomas and Battle, PLLC
Counsel for Coal-Mac, LLC
300 Kanawha Blvd., East
P.O. Box 273
Charleston, WV 25321
John M. McCracken, Esq.
Office of the Solicitor
U.S. Department of Labor
Mine Safety and Health Division
201 12 th Street
South, Suite 401
Arlington, VA 22202-5452
Chief Administrative Law Judge
Glenn Voisin
Federal Mine Safety & Health
Review Commission
1331 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW,
Suite 520N
Washington, DC 20004-1710
Melanie Garris
U.S. Department of Labor
Office of Civil Penalty
Compliance
Mine Safety and Health
Administration
201 12 th Street
South, Suite 401
Arlington, VA 22202-5452
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.