It is reported that an administrative law judge has ordered Peabody Energy Corp to pay nearly USD 174,000 of USD 230,000 proposed fines tied to questioned safety at a southern Illinois mine that federal regulators had claimed continues to endanger workers.
Calling the penalties for one of the world biggest coal producers appropriate, Mr Gary Melick issued his ruling last Thursday following an expedited hearing in June. The hearing was sought by the Labor Department Mine Safety and Health Administration over its concerns about the Willow Lake mine near Equality at Illinois.
St Louis based Peabody has defended its record at the mine which is run by its Big Ridge Inc subsidiary. A Peabody spokeswoman said the company likely would comment later Monday about the violations and fines that date to December 2008 at the 450 worker mining operation.
Mr Melick with the Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission that decides disputed mining violations, tossed out roughly USD 56,000 in proposed fines on five alleged violations, mainly involving questioned inspections by Big Ridge and an instance of leaving battery-operated equipment turned on.
Several of the violations Mr Melick upheld related to dangerous accumulations of coal dust and other combustibles in some cases faulting Big Ridge for unwarrantable failure and high negligence. Yet Mr Melick as Peabody had argued and found there is no dispute that the violations were abated promptly and in good faith.
Peabody has 40 days from the date of Mr Melick ruling to pay the fines, unless the company appeals the matter to the full review commission. In seeking the expedited resolution of the matter, the MSHA had called the violations significant and substantial and the result of Peabody disregarding or showing indifference to its safety responsibilities.
Peabody has countered that such claims were inflammatory, unfounded and confrontational, arguing that it has made an aggressively thorough review of the mine operations in pursuit of enhanced safety. The company also pressed that the MSHA's call for the expedited resolution of the contested violations was based more on building publicity than resolutions."
(Sourced from AP)
