Ezel / Agency Decisions / 01-0551-commission
OSHRC Commission decision Docket 01-0551 Decided June 23, 2005 Settled

Mead Coated Board, Inc.

Serious paper-mill violation vacated under settlement

Apply this precedent to your situation

This is citable Commission precedent from 2005, 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 2005
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

The Secretary and Mead Coated Board jointly asked the Commission to reopen its final order, vacate the portion affirming a serious paper-mill safety violation, and approve a settlement. The Commission had already stated that it would grant the requested relief if the Eleventh Circuit returned the case. After the court remanded, the Commission granted the motion, vacated the serious violation, and incorporated the settlement agreement into its order.

Decision snapshot

  • Cited standard(s): 29 C.F.R. § 1910.261(b)(1)
  • Outcome: The prior serious violation was vacated and the parties' settlement was approved.
  • Key point: A court remand allowed the Commission to reopen its final order and implement the parties' agreed resolution.

Full text (OSHRC public release)

  • no title specified

SECRETARY OF LABOR,

Complainant,

v.

OSHRC Docket No.  01-0551

MEAD COATED BOARD, INC.,

Respondent.

PACE INTERNATIONAL UNION

AND ITS LOCAL 3-1471

Authorized Employee

Representative.

ORDER

The Secretary of Labor and Respondent have filed a joint motion for relief under Rule 60(b) asking the Commission to vacate that part of its final order affirming a serious violation of 29 C.F.R. §   1910.261(b)(1) and to approve the terms of a Settlement Agreement. On February 18, 2005, the Commission issued an order in which it expressed its intention to grant this relief if the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit remanded the case to the Commission. The court having now remanded the case to the Commission, we grant the joint motion, vacate that part of our final order affirming a serious violation of 29 C.F.R.  §   1910. 261(b)(1) and approve the stipulation and settlement agreement, the terms of which are incorporated into this order.  

So ordered.

/S/___

W. Scott Railton

Chairman

_/s/________

Thomasina V. Rogers

Commissioner

Dated: _6/23/05

Get today's answer for your situation

You just read Commission precedent from 2005. 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.