Williams Gas Pipeline/South Central

Plain-English summary

An administrative law judge approved a settlement involving two amended general duty clause items and a $13,950 penalty. The named respondent then asked the Commission to change the case caption from Williams Gas Pipeline/South Central to Texas Gas Transmission Corporation, which it said was the true legal entity. The Commission found the record insufficient to decide whether the requested change should be granted. It directed review and remanded the case to the judge for further proceedings.

Decision snapshot

• Cited standard(s): 29 U.S.C. § 654(a)(1)
• Outcome: Settlement decision directed for review and case remanded to determine whether the respondent's name should be changed
• Key point: The Commission required a factual record before changing the legal entity identified as the respondent.

Full text (OSHRC public release)

SECRETARY OF LABOR,

                 Comp lainant,

                       v.                             OSHRC D ocket No. 00-2150

WILLIAMS GAS PIPELINE/SOUTH CENTRAL

                 Respon dent.



             DIRECTION FOR REVIEW AND REMAND ORDER

Before: RO GERS , Chairman; EISE NBRE Y, Comm issioner.
BY THE COMMISSION:
By order dated May 8, 2001, Administrative Law Judge Nancy J. Spies approved a
“Stipulation and Joint Motion” settlement agreement executed by the parties in the above-
captioned case. On May 24, 2001, the Respondent in this case filed a “Motion to Amend
Style of Proceeding,” asserting that the citation and all subsequent documents in the case,
including the settlemen t agreeme nt, erroneou sly identify it as Williams Gas Pipe line/South
Central, instead of Texas Gas Transmission Corporation. It requests that “the Commission
amend the style of this proceeding to reflect the true legal entity at issue in this matter.”
According to Respondent, the Secretary neither opposes nor consents to the Motion.

                                                                   2001 OSHRC N o. 14

2

  We conclude that the evidence in the record is insufficient for the Co mmission to

determine whether Respondent’s Motion should be granted. Pu rsuant to 29 U.S.C . § 661(j)
and 29 C.F.R. § 2200.92(a), the decision of the Administrative Law Judge is directed for
review. We remand this case to Judge Spies for further proceedings.
SO ORDERED.

                                            /s/
                                            Thomasina V . Rogers
                                            Chairman




                                            /s/
                                            Ross Eisenbrey
                                            Commissioner

Date: June 18, 2001
 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH REVIEW COMMISSION

Secretary of Labor,
Complainant,
v. OSHRC Docket Number. 00-2150
Williams Gas Pipeline / South
Central,
Respondent.

                              Order Approving Settlement
 On May 8, 2001, an executed stipulation and joint motion was received from the parties. The

settlement having been considered, it is ORDERED:

           1. That the terms of the settlement are approved and incorporated herein as part of this

order;

2. That the citations and proposed penalties are vacated, amended and affirmed in accordance
   with the terms of the settlement and a total penalty in the amount of $13,950 is assessed; and

   3. That Respondent's motion to withdraw its notice of contest, pursuant to the terms of settlement,
      is granted.

SO ORDERED.

                                                                            /S/

Date May 8, 2001 Judge Nancy J. Spies
100 Alabama Street, S W. Room 2R90
Atlanta, GA 30303-3104
Phone (404) 562-1640 Fax (404) 562-1650

This notice has been sent to:
For the Employer: For the Secretary of Labor:
Baker, Donelson, Bearman & Caldwell Office of the Solicitor, U S DOL
W. Davis Frye, Esq ATTN: Carla J Gunnin, Esq
P O Box14167 Chambers Bldg.,High Point Office
Jackson, MS 39236 Center, Suite 150
100 Centerview Drive
Birmingham, AL 35216
 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH REVIEW COMMISSION

SECRETARY OF LABOR,
Complainant,

        v.                                                  OSHRC DOCKET NO.

WILLIAMS GAS PIPEL INE/SOUTH CENTRAL , 00-2150
and its Successors,
Respondent.

                     STIPULATION AND JOINT MOTION

The parties stipulate and agree as follows:

I. Complainant hereby amends her Citation and Notification of Penalty for the
violations alleged in the Citation issued October 23, 2000, as follows:

         Citation 1, Item I - Item amended to allege a violation of Section 5(a)(1) of the

Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970. The item shall read as follows:

             Section 5(a)(1) of the Occupational Safety and
             Health Act of 1970: The employer did not furnish
             employment and a place of employment which were
             free from recognized hazards that were causing
             or1ikely to cause death or serious physical harm to
             employees in that employees were exposed to
             excavations without adequate protection systems.

         Citation 1, Item 2 - Withdrawn.

         Citation 1, Item 3 - Item amended to allege a violation of Section 5(a)(1) of the

Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970. The item shall read as follows:

              Section 5(a)(1) of the Occupational Safety and
              Health Act of 1970: The employer did not
              furnish employment and a place of employment
              which were free from recognized hazards that
              were causing or likely to cause death or serious
              physical harm to

employees in that employees were not removed
from the hazardous area when hazardous
conditions were found.

The total penalty shall be $13,950.

          2. Respondent represents that the purported violations, as amended, alleged in the

Citations and Notifications of Penalties issued on October 23, 2000, have been and v ill remain
abated.

           3. Respondent hereby withdraws the Notice of Contest as to such Citations and

Notifications of Penalties, as amended. Respondent states that this withdrawal was not induced
by a promise of any other party hereto except as may appear herein.

           4. Affected employees herein are represented by a certified bargaining

representative. The only affected employees represented by a certified bargaining representative
were the hourly field employees represented by the Chemical Workers Union Local Number
637 who have been provided notice of this Stipulation and Joint Motion and who have not
objected to the terms or conditions contained herein.

           5. It is understood and agreed by the parties that this agreement constitutes a

compromise of disputed claims. None of the foregoing agreements, statements, stipulations, or
actions taken by respondent pursuant thereto shall be deemed an admission by respondent of the
allegations contained within the Citation and Notification of Penalty and the Complaint herein.
None of the foregoing agreements, statements, stipulations, findings, and none of the actions
taken by respondent pursuant thereto are intended to be used for any other purpose, including as
evidence in any proceeding in any court, agency, or forum, except for proceedings arising under
the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970.
 6. Each party hereby agrees to bear its own fees (including attorney fees) and
other expenses incurred by such party in connection with any stage of this proceeding,
including, but not limited to, attorney's fees which may be available under the Equal Access to
Justice Act, as amended.

          7. Respondent will pay the total penalty of $13,950 (Thirteen Thousand Nine

Hundred Fifty and no/ 100s) within 10 (ten) days after approval of the Joint Stipulation and
Motion by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration Judge to whom this matter has
been assigned.

          8. Respondent certifies that on May 1, 2001 ,notice of the foregoing was given

to employees by posting a true copy (as executed by respondent) of this Stipulation, in
accordance with Commission’s Rule 7(g) [29 C.F.R. 2200.7(g)].

WILLIAMS GAS PIPELINE / JUDITH E. KRAMER
SOUTH CENTRAL Acting Solicitor of Labor

                                                      JAYLYNN K. FORTNEY
                                                        Regional Solicitor

                                                    CYNTHIA WELCH BROWN
                                                    Associate Regional Solicitor

                                                      CARLA J. GUNNIN
                                                      Attorney

By: /S/ By: /S/
W. Davis Frye Carla J. Gunnin
Attorney Attorney

Dated: Dated: 4/30/01
BAKER, DONELSON, BEARMAN, Attorneys for the Secretary
& CALDWELL of Labor, United States
Attorneys for Respondent. Department of Labor.

SOL Case No. 0100060
 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

        I certify that the foregoing Stipulation and Joint Motion was served this 30th day of

April, 2001, by mailing a true copy thereof by first-class mail to:

                               W. Davis Frye, Esquire
                               Baker, Donelson, Bearman &
                               Caldwell, P. C.
                               4268 1-55 North
                              Meadowbrook Office Park
                              Jackson, Mississippi 39211



                                      /s/
                             Carla J. Gunnin
                             Attorney