Warrior Met Coal Mining, LLC v. Secretary of Labor, Federal Mine Safety
663 F. App'x 809
| 11th Cir. | 2016Background
- MSHA inspector found methane in a roof cavity at explosive concentration (>5%) and issued an imminent-danger withdrawal order, stopping mining for ~20 minutes.
- Inspector identified four potential ignition sources, but the ALJ accepted only the Lo Trac vehicle (a non-permissible, mobile piece of equipment with exposed electrical parts) as a plausible ignition source.
- ALJ found the inspector’s decision objectively reasonable despite testimony that the risk was remote, and that methane can dissipate quickly once released.
- The Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission (majority) affirmed the ALJ by a 3–2 vote; two commissioners dissented, viewing the order as premature given apparent means of rapid abatement and lack of clear ignition source.
- Jim Walter Resources appealed; during the appeal its assets were purchased by Warrior Met Coal Mining, LLC, which substituted as petitioner.
- The Eleventh Circuit reviewed the Commission’s factual findings for substantial evidence and affirmed the Commission’s decision.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the inspector abused his discretion in issuing a §107(a) imminent-danger withdrawal order | Warrior: Order was premature; no reasonable expectation of injury before abatement; Lo Trac unlikely to enter area in time | Secretary/MSHA: Methane was in explosive range and a mobile, non-permissible Lo Trac could reasonably have ignited it, so withdrawal was reasonable | Held: Affirmed — substantial evidence supports ALJ that inspector did not abuse discretion |
| Proper standard of review for Commission/ALJ decision | Warrior: (implicit) Commission erred applying standard; needed closer scrutiny of inspector’s investigation | Commission/Secretary: ALJ’s factual findings get substantial-evidence review; legal conclusions reviewed de novo | Held: Court applied de novo review to legal issues and substantial-evidence for facts; declined to reweigh evidence |
Key Cases Cited
- Sumpter v. Sec'y of Labor, 763 F.3d 1292 (11th Cir. 2014) (explains de novo review of legal conclusions and substantial-evidence review of factual findings for Commission decisions)