Federal agency decisions, searchable in plain English.
Workplace-safety cases from the Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission (OSHRC) and mine-safety cases from the Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission (FMSHRC), each with a plain-English summary, the standards it cites, and whether it counts as precedent. More agencies are coming.
No decisions match these filters
Try a different search term or clear the filters.
Lloyd Industries, Inc.
Machine guarding and health violations largely affirmed
Lloyd Industries manufactured fire dampers and HVAC products at a Pennsylvania plant where a former employee's fingers were amputated by a press brake. OSHA's safety and health inspections identified unguarded machine points of operation and power-transmission parts, improperly closed electrical…
Marine Propulsion Services, Inc.
Lathe item affirmed, milling-machine item vacated
Marine Propulsion Services operated a mobile machine shop at a Portland ship-repair site. The judge found that an unguarded lathe chuck exposed the machinist to rotating jaws and surfaces that could catch clothing, rags, hair, or fingers, and that an available transparent barrier guard was…
Dillard Texas Operating Limited Partnership, and its successors
Floor and emergency-preparedness items affirmed
OSHA cited a Dillard's store for damaged floors and walls, locked or poorly fitting exits, emergency-planning deficiencies, inadequate fire-extinguisher training, machine guarding, and electrical conditions. Judge James H. Barkley affirmed an other-than-serious passageway violation because…
Aero Tec Laboratories, Inc.
Plant safety items largely affirmed with reduced penalties
Aero Tec manufactured fuel tanks and containment vessels at its New Jersey plant. The judge rejected its claim that OSHA had promised no penalties or exceeded the scope of consent because management accompanied the open inspection without objecting. The decision affirmed items involving an…
Kaspar Electroplating Corp.
Commission affirms three machine-guarding violations and vacates drill-press items
OSHA cited Kaspar Electroplating after inspecting its Shiner, Texas facility. On review, the Commission rejected Kaspar's argument that the citation was untimely, finding that OSHA issued it within six months of discovering the uncorrected conditions. It also held that a compliance officer may…
New England Industries, Inc.
Repeat and failure-to-abate items affirmed
New England Industries manufactured jewelry parts in Providence, Rhode Island, and was reinspected after failing to document correction of earlier safety and health violations. The ALJ affirmed a repeated exit-route item because broken concrete and an uneven walkway created trip hazards similar to…
Art Specialty Company
Lamp manufacturer receives mixed ruling and $5,700 penalty
OSHA cited Art Specialty Company, a 29-employee lamp manufacturer, for numerous serious and other-than-serious conditions. The judge vacated a stairway citation because the Secretary did not prove employees used the stairs, and vacated the metal-shear portion of a machine-guarding item because the…
Southeastern Paper Products Export
Machine-guarding items vacated, exit-sign items affirmed
Southeastern Paper Products operated a paper-converting facility in Miami, Florida. OSHA cited unguarded slitter blades and drill-press belts and pulleys, but the judge vacated those items because the Secretary relied on assumptions and did not prove that employees entered the danger zones during…
Conagra Flour Milling Company
Commission splits flour-mill safety citations and assesses $500
Conagra operated a flour-milling facility in Martins Creek, Pennsylvania, where OSHA cited battery servicing, powered industrial trucks, machine guarding, compressed-air cleaning, and grain-handling practices. The Commission vacated the personal-protective-equipment and eyewash items because OSHA's…
Alaska Trawl Fisheries, Inc.
OSHA jurisdiction over factory vessels affirmed
Alaska Trawl Fisheries and Golden Age Fisheries operated vessels that caught and processed fish near Dutch Harbor, Alaska. OSHA cited machine guarding, passageway, recordkeeping, welding-gas storage, and hazard-communication conditions aboard the vessels. The companies stipulated to the violations…
The Specialist of the South, Inc.
$3,000 penalty affirmed for 39 serious items
The Specialists operated a small furniture repair, refinishing, and upholstery business using flammable and toxic materials. OSHA cited 39 serious violations, primarily involving fire and explosion hazards, and proposed $9,900 in penalties. An ALJ affirmed every serious item but assessed a combined…
Harrison Furniture Manufacturing Company
Commission approves withdrawal of all citations
OSHA cited Harrison Furniture Manufacturing Company for numerous conditions at its Arkansas furniture plant after an inspection conducted under a warrant. The earlier litigation addressed whether evidence from a plant-wide inspection should be suppressed when the warrant application was based on…
University of Pittsburgh
Political-subdivision exemption rejected
OSHA cited the University of Pittsburgh's printing shop for inadequate exit capacity and an unguarded horizontal belt drive. A judge vacated the items after finding that Pitt was a political subdivision excluded from the OSH Act's definition of employer. The Commission reversed because Pitt was not…
Newspaper Printing Corp.
Failure-to-abate penalty reduced
Newspaper Printing failed to meet the abatement deadline for press-platform railings, an emergency eyewash facility, and router drive-belt guards. The company had installed or ordered replacement equipment, but the old presses and routers were still used and the eyewash fountain had not arrived by…
Edward Hines Lumber Co.
Mixed sawmill citations resolved with $510 penalty
OSHA cited Edward Hines Lumber after inspecting its large Oregon sawmill complex, alleging numerous machine-guarding, conveyor, walkway, ladder, and power-transmission violations. The judge vacated many items because the cited standards were advisory or inapplicable, the machinery was guarded by…
George T. Gerhardt Company, Inc.
Failure-to-correct penalties reduced to $300
George T. Gerhardt Company was a small sheet-metal manufacturer cited for unguarded belts and pulleys, unguarded machinery, and a spliced electrical cord. It did not contest the original citation, and a reinspection found the three conditions had not been corrected within the stated abatement…
Ricardo Correa, Jr., d/b/a Ricardo's Mexican Enterprises of Omaha
Masa-feeder failure-to-abate penalties vacated
Ricardo's Mexican Enterprises produced Mexican food in Omaha, Nebraska. OSHA initially cited conditions involving a masa feeder after a young employee was fatally injured while cleaning the machine, and the uncontested citation became final. In the later failure-to-abate case, the Commission found…
Johnson Brothers Planing Mill, Inc.
Millwork machine-guarding citations affirmed
Johnson Brothers manufactured wood products using radial and table saws, sanding equipment, belt-driven machinery, and electrical equipment with several cited guarding or grounding deficiencies. The serious citation involved unguarded lower portions of two radial-saw blades and an unguarded…
Kemmerlin Meats, Inc.
Seventeen plant violations affirmed with $235 penalties
Kemmerlin Meats admitted 17 violations at its South Carolina meatpacking plant involving compressed-gas cylinders, machine guarding, electrical wiring and grounding, housekeeping, ladders, knives, sanitation, and equipment labeling. Penalties were proposed for six items, including raw wires…
What these documents are
- Commission decisions: Rulings by the Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission itself, the highest level of agency review. These are citable as Commission precedent, though a decision may have been appealed to a U.S. Court of Appeals after issuance.
- ALJ decisions: Rulings by OSHRC Administrative Law Judges after a hearing. When no Commissioner directs review, an ALJ decision becomes a final order under 29 U.S.C. § 661(j): it binds the parties in that case but is not binding precedent in other cases.
- Why finality matters: Every page here says which kind of decision you are reading, so you know whether it is precedent you can cite or a final order that only shows how one judge ruled on one set of facts.
- Where they come from: Every page links the official OSHRC public release, and the full text on the page is that release. The plain-English summaries are written by Ezel.