🧪 TEST MODE ACTIVE Use test card: 4242 4242 4242 4242
OSHRC ALJ decision Docket 00-0495 Decided August 27, 2001 Settled Judge Michael H. Schoenfeld

Darcon Construction, Inc.

Settlement reduces penalties to $30,000

Apply this to your situation

This order from 2001 bound only the parties to this case; it isn't precedent. Ezel answers your situation under the current OSHA standards and Commission precedent, with citations.

Currency note: this decision dates from 2001
The OSHA standards may have been amended, penalty amounts have been adjusted, and later Commission or court decisions may have changed the analysis since then. Treat this page as historical context, not current compliance advice. Verify the current standard before relying on any specific rule, threshold, or penalty mentioned here.
Final order, not Commission precedent
This decision by an OSHRC Administrative Law Judge became a final order of the Commission because no Commissioner directed review (29 U.S.C. § 661(j)). It binds the parties but is not binding precedent in other cases. The full text below is from the official OSHRC release.
About this page: The plain-English summary and decision snapshot below were written by Ezel based on the official OSHRC release. The full text is the Commission's own document.
Read the official release (oshrc.gov)

Plain-English summary

OSHA cited Darcon Construction after inspecting its stucco worksite in New Rochelle, New York. The citations alleged willful, repeated, and serious construction-safety violations with $108,100 in proposed penalties. Under the settlement, two Citation 2 items were reclassified as serious and the total penalty was reduced to $30,000, payable in monthly installments. Darcon withdrew its contest to the citations as modified, stated that all cited conditions had been abated, and agreed to continue complying with the Act. The judge approved and incorporated the settlement.

Decision snapshot

  • Cited standard(s): The settlement identifies citation items but does not identify their standards.
  • Outcome: Settlement approved; two items reclassified as serious and total penalties reduced from $108,100 to $30,000.
  • Key point: The settlement resolved every citation item through reclassification, reduced penalties, abatement commitments, and withdrawal of the employer's contest.

Full text (OSHRC public release)

                    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
        OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH REVIEW COMMISSION

SECRETARY OF LABOR,

                Complainant,
                   v.                                         OSHRC DOCKET No. 00-0495

DARCON CONSTRUCTION, INC.,
Respondent.

Appearances: Susan Demitrio, Esq.
Office of the Solicitor of Labor
U. S. Department of Labor
New York, NY
For Complainant

                   Lisa A. Firko, Esq.
                   Lum, Danzis, Drasco, Positan & Kleinberg, LLC
                   Roseland, NJ
                          For Respondent

Before: MICHAEL H. SCHOENFELD, Judge

                             DECISION AND ORDER

Background and P rocedural History
This case arises under the Occupational Safety andHealth Act of 1970, 29 U.S.C. §§ 651-678
(1970) (“the Act”). From August 11, 1999 through August 27, 1999, a Compliance Officer (“CO”)
from the U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration (“OSHA”) visited Respondent’s work
site in New Rochelle, New York and conducted an inspection and investigation of Respondent. As
a result of the inspection, OSHA issued a citation to Respondent on February 10, 2000, alleging
willful, repeated and serious of violations of construction safety standards appearing in Title 29 of
the Code of Federal Regulations (“CFR”). Respondent timely contested all citations. A hearing was
-2-

held in New York, New York on May 28-29, 2001. No affected employees sought party status.

Jurisdiction
Complainant alleges and Respondent does not deny that it is an employer engaged in stucco
construction work. Respondent does not deny that it uses tools, equipment and supplies which have
moved in interstate commerce and conducts a business affecting interstate commerce.
Based on the above finding, I conclude that Respondent is an employer within the meaning of
section 3(5) of the Act. Accordingly, the Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission (“the
Commission”) has jurisdiction over the parties and the subject matter

Discussion
After the hearing, the parties announced that a settlement had been reached. See, Rule 100(a),
29 CFR § 2200/100(a).
The terms of the settlement have been reduced to writing and it has been submitted. The
terms of the settlement meet the requirements of Commission Rule 100(b), 29 C.F.R. § 2200.100(b).
Accordingly, the settlement is approved under 5 U.S.C. § 554(c)(1) and Commission Rule 100. The
terms of the stipulated settlement are incorporated, in their entirety, by reference in this order.

     SO ORDERED.




                                                           /s/

                                                    Michael H. Schoenfeld
                                                    Judge, OSHRC

Dated: 7-23-01
Washington, D.C.
SOL:SLD
61373
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

             OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY & HEALTH REVIEW COMMISSION

ELAINE L. CHAO, Secretary of Labor,
United States Department of Labor,
Complainant,
OSHRC Docket No. 00-0495
v.

DARCON CONSTRUCTION INC.,
Respondent.


                                  STIPULATED SETTLEMENT



                                                     HOWARD M. RADZELY
                                                     Acting Solicitor of Labor

                                                     PATRICIA M. RODENHAUSEN
                                                     Regional Solicitor

                                                     SUZANNE DEMITRIO
                                                     Attorney

                                                     U.S. Department of Labor
                                                     Attorneys for
                                                     ELAINE L. CHAO,
                                                     Secretary of Labor,
                                                     Complainant

POST OFFICE ADDRESS

Patricia M. Rodenhausen
Regional Solicitor
U.S. Department of Labor
201 Varick Street, Room 983
New York, New York 10014
Tel.: (212) 337-2584
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY & HEALTH REVIEW COMMISSION


ELAINE L. CHAO, Secretary of Labor,
United States Department of Labor,

              Complainant,                          OSHRC Docket No. 00-0495
                    v.

DARCON CONSTRUCTION INC.,
Respondent.


                                  STIPULATED SETTLEMENT

     Based upon the following recital, the complainant and the Respondent herein agree to the

following as a conclusion of this matter:

     1)       The Secretary hereby amends her Complaint, Citation 2, Item 1 and Citation 2, Item

2 to reclassify these violations as serious violations of the Occupational Safety and Health Act.

     2)       The Secretary herebyamends the proposed penalty and the Complaint to reflect a total

proposed penalty of $30,000, apportioned as follows:

                                              ORIGINAL             AMENDED
                                              PROPOSED             PROPOSED

CITATION NO. ITEM PENALTY PENALTY

   1                    1                      $2,100                  $2,100
   1                    2                      $3,000                  $3,000
   1                    3                      $3,000                  $3,000
   2                    1                     $56,000                  $6,300
   2                    2                     $32,000                  $3,600
   3                    1                      $6,000                  $6,000
   3                2a-2c                      $6,000                  $6,000
   4                1a-1c                          $0                      $0

Total: $108,100 $30,000

       3)     Based upon the above, the respondent herein withdraws its notice of contest and

answer as to the citations, complaint, and proposed penalty as modified.

     4)        Respondent affirmatively states that:

               a)        All conditions alleged in the citations as amended have been abated.

               b)        It will continue to comply with the Occupational Safety and Health Act.

     5)        Respondent certifies that on July 9, 2001, this stipulation will be posted where

affected employees may see it.

     6)        Respondent will pay the amended proposed penalty totaling $30,000 by forwarding

checks made payable to Occupational Safety and Health-Labor to the OSHA Tarrytown Area Office

located at 660 White Plains Road, 4th Floor, Tarrytown, New York, 10591-5107, on the following

dates:

     July 20, 2001 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $2,500
     August 20, 2001 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $2,500
     September 20, 2001 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $2,500
     October 20, 2001 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $2,500
     November 20, 2001 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $2,500
     December 20, 2001 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $2,500
     January 20, 2002 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $2,500
     February 20, 2002 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $2,500
     March 20, 2002 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $2,500
     April 20, 2002 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $2,500
     May 20, 2002 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $2,500
     June 20, 2002 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $2,500

If any such payment is not made within ten (10) days of the date on which it is due, the entire unpaid

balance of the $30,000 penalty shall be payable immediately.

     7)        Each party hereby agrees to bear its own fees and other expenses incurred by such

party in connection with any stage of this proceeding.

     8)        This proposed settlement is not to be taken as an admission for the purpose of any

proceeding other than one arising under the Occupational Safety and Health Act.
DATED: 7/6/01

       New York, New York

  DARCON CONSTRUCTION CO.                 HOWARD M. RADZELY
  Respondent                              Acting Solicitor of Labor

                                          PATRICIA M. RODENHAUSEN
     /s/                                  Regional Solicitor

BY: LISA A. FIRKO, ESQ.
Lum, Danzis, Drasco, Positan, &
Kleinberg, LLC BY: /s/
103 Eisenhower Parkway SUZANNE DEMITRIO
Roseland, NJ 07068-1049 Attorney

                                          U.S. Department of Labor
                                          Attorneys for
                                          ELAINE L. CHAO
                                          Secretary of Labor
                                          Complainant

Get today's answer for your situation

You just read what one judge decided for one employer in 2001, and it binds only those parties. Ezel checks the current OSHA standards and Commission precedent and answers your specific situation, with citations.

Opens in Ezel Pro. Every answer cites the authority it relies on.