OSHRC Commission decision Docket 982 Decided May 23, 1973 Procedural

Mitchellace, Inc.

Withdrawal of contest affirmed

Apply this precedent to your situation

This is citable Commission precedent from 1973, 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 1973
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

Mitchellace moved to withdraw its notice of contest and tendered $175 as full payment of the proposed penalty. The company also agreed to comply with the Act and standards, submit a compliance plan, immediately implement a personal protective equipment plan, and post and serve the case documents. No party objected, and the judge found that granting the motion was consistent with the Act. The judge granted the withdrawal and dismissed the proceeding, and the Commission affirmed the order in full. The release does not identify the standards involved.

Decision snapshot

  • Cited standard(s): Not identified in the release
  • Outcome: The notice of contest was withdrawn, the $175 proposed penalty was paid, and the proceeding was dismissed.
  • Key point: The uncontested withdrawal was accepted after the employer agreed to payment, compliance measures, posting, and service.

Full text (OSHRC public release)

Docket No. 982

MITCHELLACE, INC.

OSHRC Docket No. 982

Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission

May 23, 1973

Before MORAN, Chairman; VAN NAMEE, Commissioner

OPINIONBY: MORAN

OPINION:


MORAN, CHAIRMAN: On October 17, 1972, Review Commission Judge Ben D. Worcester issued an order in this case granting respondent's motion to withdraw notice of contest.

Thereafter, on November 13, 1972, pursuant to section 12(j) of the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 (29 U.S.C. 651,
et seq.,
84 Stat. 1590) that decision was directed to be reviewed by the Commission.

Having examined the record in its entirety, the Commission finds no prejudicial error therein.

Accordingly, it is ordered that the Judge's decision is hereby affirmed in all respects.

[The Judge's decision referred to herein follows]

WORCESTER, JUDGE, OSAHRC: The Respondent on September 21, 1972, moved to withdraw its notice of contest filed June 7, 1972, and has:

1.

Tendered payment of $175.00 in full payment of the proposed penalty.

2.

Agreed to comply with the Act and the standards.

3.

Agreed to submit by November 1, 1972, a proposed compliance plan and to immediately implement a personnel protective equipment plan.

4.

Has posted copies of all documents pertaining to this proceeding at its workplace; and has

5.

Served copies of all documents upon counsel for the Complainant.


Neither the Complainant nor any other party in interest has entered any objection to the granting of the motion nor is there any evidence that the granting of said motion would be inconsistent with the purpose of the Act.

It is, therefore, hereby ORDERED that the motion be granted and the proceeding dismissed.

Get today's answer for your situation

You just read Commission precedent from 1973. 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.