Paschen/Morrison-Knudsen/Kenny, A Joint Venture

Plain-English summary

A Commission judge affirmed four citation items from a tunneling operation and assessed a combined $3,300 penalty. Two items concerned testing for flammable gases and oxygen deficiency and were classified as serious rather than willful. The Secretary sought review only of that classification while asking that the same penalty remain in place. Because neither the penalty nor abatement would change, the Commission concluded that review of willfulness was not warranted and vacated the direction for review. The judge's disposition therefore remained in effect.

Decision snapshot

• Cited standard(s): The official release does not identify the standard numbers.
• Outcome: Direction for review vacated; four affirmed items and combined $3,300 penalty left undisturbed.
• Key point: The Commission declined review where changing the characterization would not affect penalty or abatement.

Full text (OSHRC public release)

Docket No. 80-6448

SECRETARY OF LABOR,

Complainant,

v.

PASCHEN/MORRISON-KNUDSEN/KENNY,

A JOINT VENTURE,

Respondent.

OSHRC Docket No. 80-6448

ORDER

Former Administrative Law Judge Ralph B. Maxwell affirmed four of five items in a citation
issued to Paschen/Morrison- Knudsen/Kenny, a joint venture, engaged in a tunneling
operation, and assessed a combined penalty of $3,300, the amount recommended by the
Secretary.  The judge found that the employer's violations of standards requiring
testing for flammable gases and oxygen deficiency were "serious", but not
"willful."  The Secretary petitioned for review solely on whether the judge
should have characterized these two violations as "willful."  Review was
directed solely on that issue.  The Secretary has not suggested that a higher penalty
should be assessed if the violations are found to be "willful"; on the contrary,
he asks that the $3,300 penalty assessed by the judge be affirmed.  Furthermore,
inasmuch as neither party has taken issue with the abatement requirements of the citation
items affirmed by the judge, abatement is not in controversy here.  In light of these
circumstances, we conclude that the issue of willfulness does not warrant Commission
review.  See P & Z Company, Inc ., 82 OSAHRC 8/C8, 10 BNA OSHC 1427,
1428, 1982 CCH OSHD � 25,937, p. 32,490 (No. 76-431, 1982)(direction for review vacated
because review no longer provident).

Accordingly, the direction for review is vacated.

FOR THE COMMISSION

Ray H. Darling, Jr.

Executive Secretary

DATED:  APR 24 1986

The Administrative Law Judge decision in this matter is unavailable in this format. To
obtain a copy of this document, please request one from our Public Information Office By
e-mail ( [email protected] ), telephone
(202-606-5398), fax (202-606-5050), or TTY (202-606-5386).