FEDERAL MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH REVIEW COMMISSION

1331 PENNSYLVANIA AVE., N.W., SUITE 520N WASHINGTON, DC 20004-1710


June 2, 2026


SECRETARY OF LABOR

MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH ADMINISTRATION (MSHA),


v.


RAMACO RESOURCES, LLC

Docket No. WEVA 2026-0038

A.C. No. 46-09541-627982


Docket No. WEVA 2026-0039

A.C. No. 46-09084-627972


Docket No. WEVA 2026-0040

A.C. No. 46-08663-627971


Docket No. WEVA 2026-0045

A.C. No. 46-09602-627985


Docket No. WEVA 2026-0046

A.C. No. 46-09533-627980


Docket No. WEVA 2026-0047

A.C. No. 46-09537-627981


BEFORE: Rajkovich, Chair; Jordan, and Baker, Commissioners


ORDER


BY: THE COMMISSION


These matters arise under the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977, 30 U.S.C.

§ 801 et seq. (2024) (“Mine Act”). On December 11, 2025, the Commission received from Ramaco Resources, LLC (“Nally”) six motions seeking to reopen penalty assessments that had become final orders of the Commission pursuant to section 105(a) of the Mine Act, 30 U.S.C.

§ 815(a).1


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


1 For the limited purpose of addressing these motions to reopen, we hereby consolidate Docket Nos. WEVA 2026-0038, WEVA 2026-0039, WEVA 2026-0040, WEVA 2026-0045,

WEVA 2026-0046, and WEVA 2026-0047, involving similar procedural issues. 29 C.F.R.

§ 2700.12.

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 assessments were delivered on October 2, 2025,

and became final orders of the Commission on November 3, 2025. Ramaco asserts that, while it received the proposed assessments on October 2, they were not scanned into their system and forwarded to the company’s Vice President of Law until October 7, 2025. The Vice President of Law mistakenly believed he had thirty days from October 7 to contest the penalties. Upon discovering his error, he immediately filed contests in each of the above-captioned cases, one day after the proposed penalties had become final orders of the Commission. 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 Ramaco’s request and the Secretary’s response, we find that the brief delay in filing the notices of contest were the result of a genuine mistake on the part of the operator. See Reading Anthracite Co., 35 FMSHRC 332 (Feb. 2013). We also note Ramaco’s assertion that it has taken steps to prevent the mistake from recurring, by placing the received date of the Proposed Assessments in the subject line of the forwarding email.

In the interest of justice, we hereby reopen these matters and remand them 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. Accordingly, consistent with Rule 28, the Secretary shall file petition for assessments of penalty within 45 days of the date of this order.

See 29 C.F.R. § 2700.28.



Mary Lu Jordan, Commissioner


Timothy J. Baker, Commissioner

Marco M. Rajkovich, Jr., Chair



Distribution:


Jonathan R. Ellis, Esq.

Mark C. Dean, Esq.

Steptoe & Johnson PLLC 707 Virginia Street East Chase Tower, 17th Floor Charleston, WV 25301

jonathan.ellis@steptoe-johnson.com mark.dean@steptoe-johnson.com


Jennifer A. Ledig, Esq. Susannah Maltz, Esq. Thomas A. Paige, Esq. Office of the Solicitor

U.S. Department of Labor

Division of Mine Safety and Health

200 Constitution Avenue NW, Suite N4428 Washington, DC 20210 Ledig.jennifer@dol.gov Maltz.susannah.m@dol.gov Paige.Thomas.a@dol.gov


Melanie Garris

US Department of Labor/MSHA Office of Assessments, Room N3454 200 Constitution Ave NW Washington, DC 20210 Garris.Melanie@dol.gov Peterson.erik@dol.gov

Acting Chief Judge David P. Simonton

Federal Mine Safety Health Review Commission 1331 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Suite 520N Washington, DC 20004-1710 dsimonton@fmshrc.gov