Container Corporation of America
Withdrawal order corrected
Apply this precedent to your situation
This is citable Commission precedent from 1973, and it may have been appealed since. Ezel checks how it stands today and answers your situation, with citations.
Plain-English summary
Container Corporation of America contested four non-serious citation items and their proposed penalties. The Secretary later withdrew two items, and the employer withdrew its contest of the other two after the parties agreed to extend one abatement date. The judge approved the stipulation but did not fully reflect those changes in the order. The Commission amended the order to dismiss two items and affirm the other two with their proposed penalties. The official decision does not state the penalty amounts.
Decision snapshot
- Cited standard(s): 29 C.F.R. § 1910.157(c)(3); 29 C.F.R. § 1910.141(g)(1) and (2)
- Outcome: Two contested items and their proposed penalties were dismissed, while two items and their proposed penalties were affirmed.
- Key point: A withdrawal order should accurately reflect citation items withdrawn by the Secretary and items accepted by the employer.
Full text (OSHRC public release)
Docket No. 1103
CONTAINER CORPORATION OF AMERICA
OSHRC Docket No. 1103
Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission
September 28, 1973
�
Before MORAN, Chairman; VAN NAMEE and CLEARY, Commissioners
OPINIONBY: CLEARY
OPINION:
�
CLEARY, COMMISSIONER: On November 22, 1972, the Judge issued his recommended decision and order in this case, granting respondent's withdrawal of its notice of contest and affirming the citations and proposed penalties issued by the Secretary.
On December 20, 1972, former Commissioner Alan F. Burch directed that the Judge's order be reviewed by the Commission pursuant to section 12(j) of the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 (29 U.S.C.A. 651
et seq.,
84 Stat. 1590, hereinafter "the Act").
Review of the record discloses that on June 12, 1972, respondent was issued two citations for non-serious violations, alleging 22 and 14 standards violations, respectively.
�
Respondent timely contested items 9 and 20 of citation number 1 and items 10 and 13 of citation number 2, together with their proposed penalties. n1
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- -Footnotes- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
n1 All noncontested items became final orders of the Commission with the passing of 15 working days from receipt of the notification of proposed penalty.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- -End Footnotes-
�
- -End Footnotes-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Thereafter, the Secretary in his complaint withdrew two of the contested items (item 20 of citation number 1 and item 10 of citation number 2) and by stipulation entered into at the hearing respondent withdrew its notice of contest as to the two remaining items when the Secretary agreed to extend the abatement date as to item 13 of citation number 2.
�
The Judge's order failed to reflect fully these amendments.
�
Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the Judge's order is amended to provide:
(1) Item 20 of citation number 1 and item 10 of citation number 2, together with the penalties proposed therefor, are dismissed.
(2) Item 13 of citation number 2, as amended, and item 9 of citation number 1, together with the penalties proposed therefor, are affirmed.
[The Judge's decision referred to herein follows]
BRADY, JUDGE, OSAHRC: This cause came on for hearing October 19, 1972.
�
By stipulation executed at that time the parties seek to resolve the matters at issue, and respondent undertakes to withdraw the notice of contest previously filed.
The stipulation reveals that the alleged violation of 29 CFR 1910.157(c)(3) will be abated immediately, and that the alleged violations of 29 CFR 1910.141(g)(1) and (2) shall be abated within a specified period of time.
�
It is shown that all parties have been served with a copy of the stipulation, and respondent has posted same in its place of business out of which said citations arose.
�
Respondent also represents that tender of the proposed penalty has been made to complainant, and that it will be in continued compliance with the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970, under which the alleged violations occurred.
The stipulation filed herein is consistent with the provisions of the aforesaid Act, and therefore is approved.
Wherefore, it is ORDERED that:
1.
�
The Notice of Contest heretofore filed by respondent be and is hereby withdrawn.
2.
�
The citations and proposed penalties issued by complainant are hereby affirmed as the final order of the Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission.
�
Get today's answer for your situation
You just read Commission precedent from 1973. Ezel checks whether it still stands, including any court review since, and answers your specific situation, with citations.
Opens in Ezel Pro. Every answer cites the authority it relies on.