Pan Building Corporation

Plain-English summary

OSHA cited Pan Building Corporation for six serious and three other-than-serious violations and proposed $8,700 in penalties. The Secretary moved to dismiss the company's notice of contest as late, while Pan argued that OSHA personnel had misled it or that procedural relief was warranted. When the parties appeared to address that motion, they announced a settlement. The Secretary withdrew the dismissal motion, and Pan agreed that all alleged violations would be affirmed. The judge approved the settlement and assessed a total penalty of $3,480.

Decision snapshot

• Cited standard(s): No specific OSHA standard is identified in the decision.
• Outcome: Settled. All six serious and three other-than-serious violations were affirmed, and the proposed penalty was reduced from $8,700 to $3,480.
• Key point: The settlement preserved Pan's contest and resolved all alleged violations at a reduced total penalty.

Full text (OSHRC public release)

OCCUPATIONAL        SAF~N~~~E~~~~~c~E”,EW                  C~~MlSSION
                           One Lafayette Centre
                     1120 20th Street, N.W. - 9th Floor
                        Washington, DC 20036-341~

SECRETARY OF LABOR
Complainan
v. OSHRC DOCKET
NO. 93-3187
PAN BUILDING CORPORATION
Respondent.

                     NOTICE OF -G

 The Administrative Law Judge’s Re rt in the above referenced m m

docketed with the Commission on MarcE”30, 1994. The decision of the we
will become a final order of the Commission on April 29,1994 unless a
Commission member directs review of the decision on or before that chte. ANY
PARTY DESIRING REVIEW OF THE JUDGE’S DECISION BY =
COMMISSION MUST FILE. A PETITION FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW. =
Any such tition should be received by the Executive Secretary on or m
April 19 64 in order to? rmit ticlent time for its review. See
Commiskion Rule 91,29 .F.R. 2200.91.
All further pleadings or communications regarding this case shall be
addressed to:
Executive Secretmy
Occupational Safety and Health
Review Commission
1120 20th St. N.W., Suite 980
Washington, D.C. 2003364419
Petitioning parties shall also mail a copy to:
Daniel J. Mick, Esq.
Counsel for Re ‘onal Trial Liti ation
Office of the SoTlcitor, U.S. Dck
Room S4004
200 Constitution Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20210
If a Direction for Review is issued by the Commission, then the Counsel for
Regional Trial Litigation will represent the Department of Labor. Any party
havmg questions about review nghts may contact the Commission’s Executive
Secretary or call (202) 6065400.
FOR THE COMMISSION

Date: March 30, 1994 Ray H. Darling, Jr.
Executive Secretary
 DOCKET NO. 93-3187
NOTICE IS GIVEN TO THE FOLLOWING:

 Daniel J. Mi4 w
 Counsel for Re I& Trial Liti ation
                 l




 office of the s4!!%tor,U.S. Dck
 Room S4004
 200 Constitution Ave., N.W.
 Washington, D.C. 20210



 Marshall H. Harris, Esq.
 Re ‘onal Solicitor
 odr ce of the Solicitor, U.S. DOL
 14480 Gatewa Buildmg
 3535 Market Htreet
 Philadelphia, PA 19104



 Michael E. Fiffik, Esquire

. Welch & Gold, P.C.
Suite 1240, Lawyers Building
428 Forbes Avenue
Pittsburgh, PA 15219

Michael H. Schoenfeld
Administrative Law Jud e
Occupational safety an d Health
 Review Commission
One Lafayette Centre
1120 20th St. N.W. Suite 990
Washington, DC 23036 3419




00108755117:03

UNITED STATES Of AMERICA
OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH REVIEW COhdhhIssION
One Lafayette Centre
1120 20th Street, N.W. - 9th Floor
Washington, DC 2003644 9

                                          ..

SECRETARY OF LABOR, ..
..
Complainant, ..
..
v. .. Docket No. 93-3187
.

PAN BUILDING CORPORATION, I
..
Respondent. ..
..
..

Appearances:
Maureen A Russo, Esquire Michael E. FifBk, Esquire
Office of the Solicitor Welch & Gold, P.C.
U.S. Department of Labor Pittsburgh, PA
For Complainant For Respondent

Before : Administrative law Judge Michael H. Schoenfeld

Background and Procedural Historv

   This case arises under the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970,29 U.S.C. 8 8

651 - 678 (1970) (“the Act”).
Having had its worksite inspected by a compliance officer of the Occupational Safety
and Health Administration, Pan Building Corporation (“Respondent”) was issued a citation
on or about January 19, 1993 alleging 6 serious and 3 other than serious violations of the Act
and proposing total monetary penalties of $8,700. Respondent contested.
The Secretary moved to dismiss Respondent’s Notice of Contest as having been
untimely filed. Respondent opposed the dismissal arguing that its notice was valid in that
it had been misled by OSHA personnel or, in the alternative, that relief under Rule m(b)
of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure was appropriate.
Pursuant to an order issued on February 14, 1994, the parties appeared on March 8,
1994, prepared to present evidence and argue the motion to dismiss. No affected employees
claimed party status. After conference, the parties announced that a stipulated settlement
had been reached. The Secretary withdrew the motion to dismiss the notice of contest and
Respondent agreed to the affirmation of all alleged violations. The parties also stipulated
that a total penalty of $3,480.00 was appropriate.

                                         ORDER


     Pursuant to the stipulated   settlement   between the parties, the citations issued to

Respondent on October 20, 1993 are AFFIRMED. A civil penalty of $3,480.00 is assessed.

                                  J’      MICHAEL H. SCHOENFELD
                                         Judge, OSHRC

Dated: MARVl1994
Washington, D.C.