Emerson Electric Company, Emerson Electric Motor Division (Commission decision, June 2, 1983)

Plain-English summary

In an earlier decision, the Commission amended serious citation item 1 to allege a crane violation under section 1910.179(n)(3)(vi), conditionally affirmed it, and assessed $300 while allowing Emerson to seek reopening. Emerson requested a hearing. The Commission treated that filing as a motion to set aside the conditional order, vacated the affirmance and penalty, and remanded so the employer could present defenses to the amended charge.

Decision snapshot

• Cited standard(s): 29 C.F.R. § 1910.179(n)(3)(vi) (overhead and gantry cranes).
• Outcome: Conditional affirmance and $300 penalty set aside; case remanded for defenses to the amended charge.
• Key point: An employer given an opportunity to contest a Commission-amended charge is entitled to present its defenses before that charge is finally affirmed.

Full text (OSHRC public release)

Docket No. 78-0275

SECRETARY OF LABOR,

Complainant,

v.

EMERSON ELECTRIC COMPANY, EMERSON

ELECTRIC MOTOR DIVISION,

Respondent.

OSHRC Docket No. 78- 0275

ORDER OF REMAND

The Commission's decision of April 27, 1983, amended serious citation item 1 to allege a violation of 29 C.F.R. sec. 1910.179(n)(3)(vi) and conditionally affirmed that item and assessed a $300 penalty. The decision gave respondent the opportunity to request that the order respecting this item be set aside and to present argument on defenses to the amended charge.

Respondent has filed a "Request for Hearing" which we interpret as a motion to set aside the order conditionally affirming the amended charge. Accordingly, the order affirming serious citation item 1 as amended and assessing a $300 penalty is set aside and this case is remanded to the Chief Administrative Law Judge to permit respondent the opportunity to present argument on defenses to the amended charge.[[1]]

FOR THE COMMISSION

Ray H.Darling, Jr.

Executive Secretary

DATED: JUN 2 1983

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)

FOOTNOTES:

[[1]] Administrative Law Judge Patton initially decided this case and is no longer with the Commission.