Jess Howard Electric Co. (Commission decision, August 24, 1977)

Plain-English summary

The Commission placed this case on review on its own initiative. Neither party objected to the judge's decision or otherwise sought a change. The Commission identified no compelling public-interest issue requiring substantive review. It affirmed the decision without passing on or modifying its merits. The release states that the ruling retains the significance of an unreviewed judge decision and does not identify the cited standards, underlying facts, outcome details, or penalties.

Decision snapshot

• Cited standard(s): Not identified in the Commission release
• Outcome: Judge's decision affirmed without substantive Commission review
• Key point: An unopposed judge decision may stand without merits review when the Commission identifies no compelling public-interest issue.

Full text (OSHRC public release)

Docket No. 76-491

JESS HOWARD ELECTRIC COMPANY

OSHRC Docket No. 76-491

Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission

August 24, 1977

�
[*1]
�

Before BARNAKO, Chairman; and CLEARY, Commissioner.

COUNSEL:

Baruch A. Fellner, Office of the Solicitor, USDOL

William S. Kloepfer, Associate Regional Solicitor, USDOL

Jesse E. Howard, President, Jess Howard Electric Company, 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.
�
Abbott-Sommer, Inc., 3 BNA OSHC 2032, 1975-76 CCH OSHD para. 20,428 (No. 9507, 1976); Crane Co., 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 order for review in this case describes no compelling public interest issue.

The Judge's decision is accorded [*2]
�
the significance of an unreviewed Judge's decision.
�
Leone Constr. Co., 3 BNA OSHC 1979, 1975-76 CCH OSHD para. 20,387 (No. 4090, 1976).

It is ORDERED that the decision be affirmed.
�