🧪 TEST MODE ACTIVE Use test card: 4242 4242 4242 4242
Ezel / Agency Decisions / 76-3641-commission
OSHRC Commission decision Docket 76-3641 Decided May 6, 1977 Procedural

Texaco, Inc.

Commission vacates a judge's order and remands to consider an amendment request

Apply this precedent to your situation

This is citable Commission precedent from 1977, and it may have been appealed since. Ezel checks how it stands today and answers your situation, with citations.

Currency note: this decision dates from 1977
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.
Decision of the Commission
This is a decision of the Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission, the highest level of agency review, citable as Commission precedent. It may have been appealed to a U.S. Court of Appeals after issuance; check subsequent history before relying on it. 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

This is a brief procedural order in a case involving Texaco, Inc. The Commission directed the case for review on its own authority under 29 U.S.C. § 661(i). It vacated an order that Administrative Law Judge McQuade had issued on April 7, 1977, and sent the case back to the judge so that he could consider the employer's request to amend that order. The order does not describe the underlying citation, the standards at issue, or any penalty, so those details cannot be stated from this document. The practical effect is simply that the judge's earlier order was set aside and the case returned for the judge to act on the amendment request.

Decision snapshot

  • Cited standard(s): None stated in the order.
  • Outcome: Procedural. The Commission vacated the ALJ's April 7, 1977 order and remanded the case for consideration of the respondent's request to amend that order.
  • Key point: The Commission returned the case to the ALJ to rule on the employer's motion to amend the judge's order; no merits question was decided.

Full text (OSHRC public release)

Docket No. 76-3641

TEXACO, INC.
�

OSHRC Docket No. 76-3641

Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission

May 5, 1977

COUNSEL:

�
[*1]
�

Francis V. LaRuffa, Regional Solicitor, U.S. Department of Labor

John E. Tuohy, Texaco, Inc., for the employer

Baruch A. Fellner, Office of the Solicitor, USDOL

OPINION:

DIRECTION FOR REVIEW AND ORDER

Pursuant to 29 U.S.C. 661(i) the above-captioned case is hereby directed for review.
�
The order of Judge McQuade dated April 7, 1977 is vacated and the case remanded for consideration of Respondent's request for amendment of the order.
�

Get today's answer for your situation

You just read Commission precedent from 1977. 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.