CHICAGO BRIDGE & IRON COMPANY
OSHRC Docket No. 808
Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission
December 29, 1972
[*1]
Before MORAN, Chairman; VAN NAMEE and BURCH, Commissioners
OPINIONBY: BURCH
OPINION:
BURCH, COMMISSIONER: On November 17, 1972, Judge Jose J. Saul issued an order in this case granting respondent's motion to withdraw notice of contest.
Pursuant to section 12(j) of the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 (29 U.S.C.A. 651, et seq., 84 Stat. 1590, hereinafter referred to as "the Act"), I am hereby directing that the Judge's decision be reviewed by the Commission.
The Commission has reviewed the record in this case noting that on March 27, 1972, respondent was issued one citation for serious violation of the Act together with a proposed penalty of $800. A timely notice of contest was filed and issue was joined with exchange of the Secretary's complaint and respondent's answer.
The respondent thereafter submitted a motion to withdraw notice of contest wherein respondent certified compliance with those conditions precedent essential to hospitable consideration by the Commission of such motions.
Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the Judge's order is amended to provide that respondent's motion to withdraw notice of contest is granted and the Secretary's citation and notification of proposed [*2] penalty are affirmed.
[The Judge's decision referred to herein follows]
SAUL, JUDGE, OSAHRC: This case is before the undersigned Judge upon assignment of the Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission.
The Respondent has moved to withdraw its notice of contest, stating that it is in compliance with all provisions of the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970, and will remain in compliance; that abatement is inapplicable since the operations in question were terminated by the destruction of the storage tanks mentioned in the citation; and that the Notice of Contest herein was filed in accordance with the requirements of the Commission. The Complainant has filed his Response to Respondent's Motion, stating inter alia that the operations in question were terminated, and the Notice of Contest filed, as recited in the Motion, and stating also that the Complainant has no objection to Respondent's Motion.
The undersigned has since been advised by the Complainant that he has received from the Respondent a check in the sum of $800.00, the amount of the proposed penalty herein.
The undersigned has also been advised by the Respondent that posting of copies of the [*3] said Motion and Response thereto has been effected as of October 17, 1972. No objections to the said Motion have been filed.
It is determined that the Motion should be granted, and it is so ordered.
There being no further contest in this case, it is recommended that this Order be made the Order of the Commission.