K.L. House Construction Company

Plain-English summary

This consolidated case reached the Commission only because a Commissioner ordered review on his own motion. Neither the employer nor the Secretary filed any objection to the administrative law judge's decision, either by petitioning for review or by responding to the review order. Because no party was dissatisfied and there was no compelling public interest, the Commission declined to reexamine, modify, or change the judge's decision. It ordered the decision affirmed and gave it the limited significance of an unreviewed judge's decision. The order does not restate what the underlying citations decided.

Decision snapshot

• Cited standard(s): None identified in this order.
• Outcome: Procedural. On a sua sponte review with no objections filed, the Commission declined to reach the merits and ordered the judge's decision affirmed, according it the significance of an unreviewed judge's decision.
• Key point: When a case is directed for review but no party expresses dissatisfaction, the Commission will not disturb the judge's decision absent a compelling public interest, and the decision carries only the weight of an unreviewed ALJ ruling.

Full text (OSHRC public release)

[Transcriber's note: The official OSHRC HTML release contained Unicode replacement characters (U+FFFD) used only as empty separator glyphs, which were dropped; no wording was changed. The bracketed star-pagination markers ([1], [2]) appear in the official source and are reproduced as released. The spelling "unreviwed" appears as released.]

Docket Nos. 76-0079; 76-0327

K.L. HOUSE CONSTR. COMPANY

OSHRC Docket Nos. 76-0079; 76-0327

Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission

January 30, 1978

[*1]

Before CLEARY, Chairman; and BARNAKO, Commissioner.

COUNSEL:

Baruch A. Fellner, Office of the Solicitor, USDOL

Ronald M. Gaswirth, Regional Solicitor, USDOL

Charles E. Barnhart, for the employer

OPINION:

DECISION

This case is before the Commission pursuant to a sua sponte order for review. The parties have filed no objections to the Administrative Law Judge's decision, either by way of petitions for discretionary review or response to the order for review. Accordingly, there has been no appeal to the Commission, and no party has otherwise expressed dissatisfaction with the Administrative Law Judge's decision.

In these circumstances, the Commission declines to pass upon, modify or change the Judge's decision in the absence of compelling public interest. See Abbott-Sommer, Inc., 76 OSAHRC 21/A2, 3 BNA OSHC 2032, 1975-76 CCH OSHD para. 20,428 (No. 9507, 1976); Crane Co., 76 OSAHRC 37/A2, 4 BNA OSHC 1015, 1975-76 CCH OSHD para. 20,508 (No. 3336, 1976). See also Keystone Roofing Co., Inc., v. O.S.H.R.C., 539 F.2d 960, 964 (3d Cir. 1976).

The Judge's decision is accorded the significance of an unreviwed Judge's decision. See Leone Construction Co., 76 [*2] OSAHRC 12/E6, 3 BNA OSHC 1979, 1975-76 CCH OSHD para. 20,387 (No. 4090, 1976).

It is ORDERED that the decision be affirmed.