Andalex Resources, Inc. v. Director, Office of Workers' Compensation Programs
713 F. App'x 484
| 6th Cir. | 2017Background
- Eddie Smith worked for Andalex from 1988 through December 1993; he then worked for Ikerd-Bandy from December 1993 until about March 1994 when he suffered a heart attack.
- Smith’s W-2 and Social Security records showed earnings from Ikerd-Bandy in 1994 and 1995, but records did not conclusively establish employment start/end dates at Ikerd-Bandy.
- Under the Black Lung Benefits Act regulations, the “responsible operator” is the most recent employer that employed the miner for a cumulative period of at least one year (defined as calendar year(s) or partial periods totaling 365 days with at least 125 working days), with alternative earnings-based calculation if dates are insufficient. 20 C.F.R. §§ 725.494, 725.495, 725.101(a)(32).
- Andalex argued Ikerd-Bandy was the responsible operator because Smith allegedly worked for Ikerd-Bandy for at least one year (pointing to Smith’s ambiguous deposition statements and 1994–1995 earnings records).
- The ALJ found Smith’s testimony on employment duration was of little probative weight, concluded Andalex failed to prove Ikerd-Bandy employed Smith one year, and used the earnings-based formula to calculate that Smith worked only 92 days for Ikerd-Bandy in 1994–1995.
- The BRB remanded for explanation; on remand the ALJ reaffirmed his findings and the BRB affirmed. The Sixth Circuit denied Andalex’s petition for review, holding substantial evidence supported designation of Andalex as the responsible operator.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Andalex) | Defendant's Argument (Smith/BRB/ALJ) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Who is the responsible operator under the Black Lung Act? | Ikerd-Bandy was the miner’s last employer for at least one year, so it should be liable. | Andalex was the last employer to satisfy the one-year requirement because evidence does not establish a year of coal-mine employment at Ikerd-Bandy. | ALJ and BRB correctly designated Andalex as responsible operator. |
| Were Smith’s deposition statements sufficient to establish Ikerd-Bandy employment of one year? | Yes—Smith once said he worked ~two years for Ikerd-Bandy and W-2/SSA earnings show pay in 1994–1995. | Smith was an unreliable historian; his later statements and medical records indicate work ended by March 1994. | The ALJ permissibly gave Smith’s testimony little weight; statements were not sufficient. |
| Could the earnings records alone establish continuous employment through 1995? | Earnings in 1995 indicate employment extended to 1995, proving one-year tenure. | Earnings could reflect unpaid leave/sick or partial-year pay; no conclusive start/end dates, so must use the regulatory earnings-based calculation. | Court upheld ALJ’s use of the C.F.R. formula and rejection of earnings alone as conclusive. |
| Was the ALJ’s use of the earnings-based formula supported by substantial evidence? | Andalex contended it was unnecessary if employment dates were established. | The ALJ applied the regulatory formula because dates were not established and computed only 92 working days for Ikerd-Bandy. | Substantial evidence supports the ALJ’s calculation and conclusion that Ikerd-Bandy did not meet the 125-day/one-year threshold. |
Key Cases Cited
- Ark. Coals, Inc. v. Lawson, 739 F.3d 309 (6th Cir. 2014) (coal operators liable to the maximum extent feasible under the Black Lung Act)
- Brandywine Explosives & Supply v. Dir., OWCP, 790 F.3d 657 (6th Cir. 2015) (definition of substantial evidence review and administrative adjudication standards)
- Jonida Trucking, Inc. v. Hunt, 124 F.3d 739 (6th Cir. 1997) (appellate review limited to whether ALJ had substantial evidence to support decision)