🧪 TEST MODE ACTIVE Use test card: 4242 4242 4242 4242
OSHRC Commission decision Docket 77-4333, 78-0611 Decided August 8, 1980 Procedural

Weatherby Engineering Company

Respirator case severed from platform review

Apply this precedent to your situation

This is citable Commission precedent from 1980, 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 1980
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

OSHA issued separate cases after one inspection of Weatherby's offshore drilling-rig module fabrication workplace. The judge consolidated the cases and affirmed a respirator breathing-air citation in Docket 78-0611 without a penalty. Commission review was directed only on a guardrail item in Docket 77-4333, and neither party challenged the disposition of Docket 78-0611. The Commission therefore severed Docket 78-0611 and left Docket 77-4333 pending for review.

Decision snapshot

  • Cited standard(s): 29 C.F.R. § 1910.28(a)(3); 29 C.F.R. § 1910.134(d)(2)(ii)
  • Outcome: Docket 78-0611 severed; review continued only in Docket 77-4333
  • Key point: Consolidated cases may be severed when Commission review concerns issues in only one docket

Full text (OSHRC public release)

Docket Nos. 77-4333; 78-0611

1 of 202 DOCUMENTS

TURNER COMPANY

A. SCHONBEK & CO., INC.

NORANDA ALUMINUM, INC.

GENERAL MOTORS CORP., GM ASSEMBLY DIV.

ALLIED PLANT MAINTENANCE CO. OF OKLAHOMA, INC.

CLEMENT FOOD COMPANY

MILLCON CORPORATION

FWA DRILLING COMPANY, INC.

CCI, INC.

GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY

CONSOLIDATED ALUMINUM CORPORATION

THE BRONZE CRAFT CORPORATION

CARGILL, INC.

CHAPMAN CONSTRUCTION CO., INC.

GALLO MECHANICAL CONTRACTORS, INC.

SPECIAL METALS CORPORATION

WILLAMETTE IRON AND STEEL COMPANY

NASHUA CORPORATION

WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC CORPORATION

RESEARCH-COTTRELL, INC.

ROCKWELL INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION

NEWPORT NEWS SHIPBUILDING & DRYDOCK CO.

NEWPORT NEWS SHIPBUILDING & DRYDOCK CO.

BUNKOFF CONSTRUCTION CO., INC.

GENERAL MOTORS CORPORATION, FRIGIDAIRE DIVISION

HARRIS BROTHERS ROOFING CO.

GENERAL DIVERS COMPANY

ORMET CORPORATION

R. ZOPPO CO., INC.

COEUR D'ALENE TRIBAL FARM

L. A. DREYFUS COMPANY

CMH COMPANY, INC.

BENTON FOUNDRY, INC.

MICHAEL CONSTRUCTION CO., INC.

WHIRLPOOL CORPORATION

BROWN & ROOT, POWER PLANT DIVISION

MARION POWER SHOVEL CO., INC.

ERSKINE-FRASER CO.

MORRISON-KNUDSEN AND ASSOCIATES

THE BOAM COMPANY

DIC-UNDERHILL, a Joint Venture

C. R. BURNETT AND SONS, INC.; HARLLEE FARMS

STRIPE-A-ZONE, INC.

FORTE BROTHERS, INC.

RAYBESTOS FRICTION MATERIALS COMPANY

TEXLAND DRILLING CORPORATION

THE ANACONDA COMPANY, WIRE AND CABLE DIVISION

SAM HALL & SONS, INC.

VAMPCO METAL PRODUCTS, INC.

LEONE INDUSTRIES, INC.

ASARCO, INC.

DURANT ELEVATOR, A DIVISION OF SCOULAR-BISHOP GRAIN COMPANY

PLUM CREEK LUMBER COMPANY

PLUM CREEK LUMBER COMPANY

STEARNS-ROGER, INC.

FERRO CORPORATION, (ELECTRO DIVISION)

AMERICAN PACKAGE COMPANY, INC.

BROWN & ROOT, INC., POWER PLANT DIVISION

FLEETWOOD HOMES OF TEXAS, INC.

DONALD HARRIS, INC.

A. PROKOSCH & SONS SHEET METAL, INC.; MID-HUDSON AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER COMPANY, INC.

ELECTRICAL CONSTRUCTORS OF AMERICA, INC.

DAYTON TIRE & RUBBER COMPANY (Division of the Firestone Tire & Rubber Company)

ASARCO, INC., EL PASO DIVISION; HUGHES TOOL COMPANY

NAVAJO FOREST PRODUCTS INDUSTRIES

METROPAK CONTAINERS CORPORATION

AUSTIN BUILDING COMPANY

BABCOCK AND WILCOX COMPANY

DARRAGH COMPANY

BABCOCK & WILCOX COMPANY

OTIS ELEVATOR COMPANY

R. ZOPPO COMPANY, INC.

LUTZ, DAILY & BRAIN - CONSULTING ENGINEERS

PENNSYLVANIA POWER & LIGHT CO.

HARSCO CORPORATION, d/b/a PLANT CITY STEEL COMPANY

NORTHWEST AIRLINES, INC.

INDEPENDENCE FOUNDRY & MANUFACTURING CO., INC.

GENERAL MOTORS CORPORATION, INLAND DIVISION

WELDSHIP CORPORATION

S & S DIVING COMPANY

SNIDER INDUSTRIES, INC.

NATIONAL STEEL AND SHIPBUILDING COMPANY

MAXWELL WIREBOUND BOX CO., INC.

CONTINENTAL GRAIN COMPANY

MISSOURI FARMER'S ASSOCIATION, INC., MFA BOONVILLE EXCHANGE; MFA, INC., d/b/a MFA GRAIN DIVISION; DESERT GOLD FEED COMPANY

CAPITAL CITY EXCAVATING CO., INC.

GAF CORPORATION

PPG INDUSTRIES (CARIBE) a Corporation

DRUTH PACKAGING CORPORATION

SOUTHWESTERN ELECTRIC POWER COMPANY

TUNNEL ELECTRIC CONSTRUCTION CO.

WEATHERBY ENGINEERING COMPANY

OSHRC Docket Nos. 77-4333; 78-0611

Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission

August 8, 1980


[*1]

Before: CLEARY, Chairman; BARNAKO and COTTINE, Commissioners.

COUNSEL:

Baruch A. Fellner, Office of the Solicitor, USDOL

James E. White, Reg. Sol., USDOL

Edward M. Morris, President, Occupational Safety Consultants, Inc., for the employer

OPINION:

DECISION

BY THE COMMISSION:

A decision of Administrative Law Judge Dee C. Blythe is before the Commission for review pursuant to section 12(j), 29 U.S.C. �

661(i), of the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970, 29 U.S.C. � �

651-678 ("the Act").

The Respondent, Weathereby Engineering Company, has a workplace in Corpus Christi, Texas, where it is engaged in the fabrication of modules for installation on offshore drilling rigs.

Between September 15 and November 4, 1977, a compliance safety and health officer employed by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration conducted an inspection of the [*2]

Respondent's workplace. As a result of the inspection, three citations alleging serious (citation 1), repeated (citation 2), and nonserious (citation 3) violations of the Act were issued to the Respondent.

Citations 1 and 2 were issued on November 23, 1977, and contested by the Respondent on December 10, 1977.


Citation 3 alleged a single nonserious violation of the Act in that the Respondent in two instances failed to comply with 29 C.F.R. �

1910.134(d)(2)(ii).

Specifically, the Respondent was charged with using two oil-lubricated compressors to supply breathing air to respirators without (A) equipping the compressors with carbon monoxide alarms or (B) frequently testing the air from the compressors for carbon monoxide. Citation 3 was separately issued on January 24, 1978, and separately contested by the Respondent on February 3, 1978.


Independent complaints were thereafter filed by the Secretary of Labor ("the Secretary") in both proceedings.

In April 1978 orders were issued assigning both of the captioned cases to Judge Blythe.

On April 20, 1978, the judge entered an order [*3]

consolidating the two cases and scheduling them for a unified hearing.

Judge Blythe based his consolidation order on his "inspection of the files in the captioned cases" which indicated to him "that they involve common issues of law and fact, in that they involve the same respondent and a rose from the same inspection . . . ." n1

                                  • -Footnotes- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

n1 The judge's order was authorized under Rule 9 of the Commission's Rules of Procedure, 29 C.F.R. �

2200.9, which provides the following:

Cases may be consolidated on the motion of any party, on the judge's own motion, or on the Commission's own motion, where there exist common parties, common questions of law or fact, or both, or in such other circumstances as justice and the administration of the Act require.

                                • -End Footnotes- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

After the cases had been heard before the judge and briefs had been filed by both parties, Judge Blythe issued a single decision covering both cases.

In Docket No. 78-0611, the judge affirmed the only citation at issue (citation 3, supra) and adopted the Secretary's proposal [*4]

that no penalty be assessed.

Neither party petitioned the Commission for review of any part of the judge's decision or order in Docket No. 78-0611.

Nevertheless, the Secretary sought review and review was directed by Chairman Cleary of the judge's order with respect to one citation item at issue in Docket No. 77-4333 -- item 2 of citation 1, which alleged a serious violation of the Act due to failure to comply with the requirement of 29 C.F.R. �

1910.28(a)(3) that guardrails be installed on the open sides and ends of platforms more than ten feet above the ground or floor.

Accordingly, while the direction for review listed both docket numbers, 77-4333 and 78-0611, the only issue on review is one relating solely to Docket No. 77-4333.

We therefore conclude that there is good cause for severing Docket No. 78-0611 from Docket No. 77-4333, which remains before us on review, and we hereby enter an order severing the cases under Commission Rule 10, 29 C.F.R. �

2200.10. n2

                                  • -Footnotes- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

n2 Commission Rule 10 provides the following:

Upon its own motion, or upon motion of any party or intervenor, the Commission or the judge may, for good cause, order any proceeding severed with respect to some or all issues or parties.


[*5]

                                • -End Footnotes- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

The direction for review indicates no issue, either general or specific, to be considered in Docket No. 78-0611.

Moreover, neither party has taken exception to any part of the judge's decision relating t Docket No. 78-0611.


See Abbott-Sommer, Inc., 76 OSAHRC 21/A2, 3 BNA OSHC 2032, 1975-76 CCH OSHD P20,428 (No. 9507, 1976).

See also, Duriron Co., 80 OSAHRC    , 8 BNA OSHC 1575, 1980 CCH OSHD P24,556 (Nos. 77-2846 & 77-2847, 1980).

So ordered/.

Get today's answer for your situation

You just read Commission precedent from 1980. 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.