Monterey Coal Co. v. Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission, 79-1827

Citation635 F.2d 291
Decision Date17 November 1980
Docket NumberNo. 79-1827,79-1827
Parties1980 O.S.H.D. (CCH) P 24,938 MONTEREY COAL COMPANY, Petitioner, v. FEDERAL MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH REVIEW COMMISSION, Respondent. United Mine Workers of America, Intervenors. Secretary of Labor, Intervenor. Climax Molybdenum Co., Amicus Curiae. Association of Bituminous Contractors, Inc., Amicus Curiae. American Mining Congress, Amicus Curiae.
CourtUnited States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (4th Circuit)

Timothy M. Biddle, Washington, D. C. (Thomas C. Means, Crowell & Moring, John F. Buergler, Washington, D. C., on brief), for petitioner Monterey Coal Co.

Judith N. Macaluso, U. S. Dept. of Labor, Washington, D. C. (Carin Ann Clauss, Sol. of Labor, Morell E. Mullins, Associate Sol., Cynthia L. Attwood, Appellate Litigation, Washington, D. C., on brief), for intervenor Secretary of Labor.

Harrison Combs, Mary Lu Jordan, Marilyn Townsend, Washington, D. C., on brief, for intervenor United Mine Workers of America.

W. Michael Hackett, Amax Inc. Law Dept., on brief, for amicus curiae Climax Molybdenum Co.

Henry Chajet, Washington, D. C., Michael F. Duffy, Washington, D. C., on brief, for amicus curiae American Mining Congress.

William H. Howe, Timothy J. Parsons, Loomis, Owen, Fellman & Howe, Washington, D. C., on brief, for amicus curiae Association of Bituminous Contractors, Inc.

Before BUTZNER, RUSSELL and MURNAGHAN, Circuit Judges.

BUTZNER, Circuit Judge:

This petition for review is from an order of the Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission reversing an administrative law judge's decision that the Mine Safety and Health Administration unjustifiedly cited Monterey Coal Company, a mine owner, instead of Frontier-Kemper Constructors, an independent contractor, for safety violations at a mine construction site. The Commission remanded the case to the administrative law judge for further proceedings to determine whether the alleged violations occurred.

Monterey petitioned under § 106(a)(1) of the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977, 30 U.S.C. § 816(a)(1) (1980 Supp.), for review of the Commission's decision. The Secretary of Labor moved to dismiss the petition on the ground that a remand order is not a reviewable final order. We conclude that the petition for review is premature and grant the motion to dismiss.

The Act grants "(a)ny person adversely affected or aggrieved by an order of the Commission" review in a court of appeals. 30 U.S.C. § 816(a)(1) (1980 Supp.). A related provision, § 816(b), states: "The Secretary may also obtain review or enforcement of any final order of the Commission by filing a petition for such relief in the United States court of appeals ...." The Senate report explains: "Persons adversely affected by the Commission's final order may obtain a review of such order in any appropriate U. S. court of appeals. The Secretary may also obtain review or enforcement of any final order to (sic) the Commission in any appropriate U. S. court of appeals." S.Rep.No.95-181, 95th Cong., 1st Sess., at 13 (1977), U.S.Code Cong. & Admin.News 1977, pp. 3401, 3413, reprinted in Senate Subcommittee on Labor, Committee on Human Resources, 95th Cong., 2d Sess., Legislative History of The Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977, at 601. The statute, amplified by this legislative history, demonstrates congressional intent that only final Commission orders should be reviewed. Our conclusion is consistent with orders of two other courts of appeals that have dismissed as premature petitions for review of the Commission's remand orders. 1

We have previously decided that an order of remand in an enforcement proceeding is not a reviewable final order. See Fieldcrest Mills, Inc. v. Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission, 545 F.2d 1384 (4th Cir. 1976). 2 Here, as in Fieldcrest, Monterey has not exhausted its administrative remedies. Monterey has not yet been found liable for any violation of the Act. During...

To continue reading

Request your trial
8 cases
  • Meredith v. Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Com'n
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — District of Columbia Circuit
    • 4 Junio 1999
    ...Inc. v. Federal Mine Safety & Health Review Comm'n, 920 F.2d 738, 743-44 (11th Cir.1990); Monterey Coal Co. v. Federal Mine Safety & Health Review Comm'n, 635 F.2d 291, 292-93 (4th Cir.1980). 2. The Collateral Order Petitioners next contend that the Commission's order should be reviewable u......
  • Shawnee Coal Co. v. Andrus
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Sixth Circuit
    • 5 Octubre 1981
    ...1158 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 402 U.S. 935, 91 S.Ct. 1399, 28 L.Ed.2d 870 (1970). See also Monterey Coal Co. v. Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission, 635 F.2d 291, 293 (4th Cir. 1980). The decision of the district court is reversed and the case is remanded to the district court......
  • Cobra Natural Res., LLC v. Fed. Mine Safety & Health Review Comm'n
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Fourth Circuit
    • 27 Enero 2014
    ...“final order,” we have recognized that only a final Commission order is entitled to review in this Court. See Monterey Coal Co. v. FMSHRC, 635 F.2d 291, 292–93 (4th Cir.1980); see also Bell v. New Jersey, 461 U.S. 773, 778–79, 103 S.Ct. 2187, 76 L.Ed.2d 312 (1983) (“The strong presumption i......
  • Cobra Natural Res., LLC v. Fed. Mine Safety & Health Review Comm'n
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Fourth Circuit
    • 29 Enero 2014
    ..."final order," we have recognized that only a final Commission order is entitled to review in this Court. See Monterey Coal Co. v. FMSHRC, 635 F.2d 291, 292-93 (4th Cir. 1980); see also Bell v. New Jersey, 461 U.S. 773, 778-79 (1983) ("The strong presumption is that judicial review will be ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT